From dougo@ccs.neu.edu Fri Aug  1 16:50:29 1997
Received: from vega.neu.edu (vega.ccs.neu.edu [129.10.115.77])
	by amber.ccs.neu.edu (8.8.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA08284; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 16:50:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by vega.neu.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA04580; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 16:50:15 -0400
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 16:50:15 -0400
Message-Id: <199708012050.QAA04580@vega.neu.edu>
From: Doug Orleans <dougo@ccs.neu.edu>
To: Karl Lieberherr <lieber@ccs.neu.edu>
Cc: dem@ccs.neu.edu
Subject: Re: visual developmentof strategies
In-Reply-To: <199707300324.XAA12742@stockberg.ccs.neu.edu>
References: <199707300324.XAA12742@stockberg.ccs.neu.edu>
X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid
X-Face: (4D-osoq?}7M3\EgvbWKo<JkN/8h)A`1b^S1[8/OtYE1A61B!AOmH#YD+{HKhr7}@8gMv~.
	 tsxTzT"g.oP0dTl!q
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Status: R

Karl Lieberherr writes:
 > It is interesting that in this approach we can only define strategies 
 > where the node map is one to one. For example, we cannot define:
 > 
 > x1:A->x2:B
 > x2:B->x3:A
 > 
 > It is also interesting that Doug's implementation seems to allow
 > only strategies of this kind? Doug, is this correct? 

Yes, currently.