Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

2
  • "From my point of view the assumption is being made here that the door state is a binary state when in fact it is at least a ternary state:" and "You enable the operation of the oven based on the door being closed or not closed. You do not care how open the door is." contradict each other. Also, I don't think the question is about doors and sensors at all. Commented Jun 14, 2017 at 8:41
  • @Sanchises The statements are not contradictory as you have taken them out of context. The first statements is in the context that two opposing binary measurements of a ternary state can not be interchanged via binary negation. The second statement is in the context that only partial knowledge of a ternary state may be sufficient for an application to correctly work. As for the doors, the OPs question referenced doors being open and closed. I am just pointing out an obvious assumption that can influence the how data is treated. Commented Jun 14, 2017 at 11:21