Talk:Bigraph

Untitled

Can we consider not redirecting to bipartite graphs, and instead including a disambiguation page so that it is possible to add an entry for the theory of Bigraphs, the concurrency meta-model by Milner et al? This is a notable theory and strangely absent from wikipedia. e.g. refs: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=bigraphs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.142.243 (talk)

Certainly there can be such an article if somebody wants to write it. But right now, it doesn't exist so a disambiguation page is not appropriate, nor is an article that is devoid of content with only an external link and maintenance tags. As such, I am reverting back to a redirect. -- Whpq (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

We could really do with some illustrations, given that one of the purported benefits of bigraphs is the ability to construct diagrams that are completely formal. If nobody has any free images to offer, I will try to create something. GianP (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the heading "For graphs on two kinds of vertices, where all edges connect different kinds of vertices, see Bipartite graph" misunderstands the term 'Bipartite graph'. 89.204.177.130 (talk) 03:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I have neatened up the text in accordance with your suggestion. Wicko3 (talk) 09:51, 27 November 2011 (UTC)