A delicate bit of logic

I have been wrestling with how narrative structure, which allows for multiple levels of nested sub-narrative as well as the ability to negate sub-narratives, could be recorded in a sequence of topic structures. Finally I decided it does not matter because in practice, deep layers of nested negations, do not occur. We negate the attribute. We negate the topic and, when things get more complicated, we negate stories - which themselves are single topics.

But when it comes to negating a sequence of topics, as a group, we may overwrite pre-existing sub-groups that are already blocked in sub-narratives. The only way to keep track of the actual nesting, without flattening it with some algorithm, is to keep track of a tree. The tree could be stored extra-topically, or encoded and saved within single topics. Either way we get into a world of pain because then the topic sequence, by itself, is no longer the only content. Which defeats the purpose of the approach I have been trying to achieve. The whole point is that nesting of sub-narratives is lost, in a "flat" sequence of topics.

So I am willing, for now, to live with the idea of blocking whatever you want, at the expense of losing previous blocks. By limiting blockage to attributes and single topics, we make a choice. It may be limiting but maybe it is worth it for the corresponding simplification. If an example comes up forcing a revision I'll be unhappy.