I am writing an exercise with VHS tapes and VCRs, but I get the following error message, when I define the relation between a tape and the player that (almost) contains it.
“Almost,” because I define a tape player as a kind of device, which incorporates a tape slot (a kind of container), which is what actually contains the tape. Since I cannot say “the player contains the tape” or “the tape is in the player,” I want to define a new relation that will facilitate such references.
"VHS" A tape is a kind of thing. A tape player is a kind of device. A tape slot is a kind of container. One tape slot is part of every tape player. Playability relates a tape player (called P) to a tape (called T), when the P incorporates a part that contains the T. The verb to play means the playability relation. The Editing Suite is a room.
Isn’t T (a tape) the name of a kind? Or is the compiler confused by something else?
(By the way, can’t we simply say “A has/carries B,” when A incorporates a part that contains B?)
Indeed; by the comma in the relation definition. Moreover, the "P incorporates a part that… " doesn’t help, either. Here is the syntax that makes sense:
Playability relates a tape player (called P) to a tape (called T) when the P incorporates a thing that contains the T. The verb to play means the playability relation.
Nice talking to myself.