The main research questions we consider here are:
- can we change the space syntax of streets with planting more trees?

- can we visit some cities during lock down through experiencing streets topology?

- can we actually derive the real space syntax from the observation (empirical data)?

Or are there any universal rules of space syntax?

Similar to Chomsky generative grammar?

I

Space axioms or morphological objects (what in Hilier et al. 1976 is defined):

0. we assume the city to be two-dimensional although in some cases this is going beyond that (but as also evidently noted in Hilier et al. "humans cannot fly")

1. city gives limited space for people to move, people are moving in confined media which can be approximated by a graph (or a network),

where nodes are not just crossings, but important hubs on the streets, locations of amenities, trees etc.

2. buildings located in space are formed by convex, which at different scales can be considered as points (on a map), convex (set of points).

II

Space syntax formation rules:

0. Given one building and it geometric form (e.g. convex or non convex) we can observe that as a seed of a city and

as a point of our city syntax

1. Given two building next to each other and a road connecting them we already deal with the line of city syntax - a road. A road

in this context is an abstraction, since it can be a geometrical object connecting two houses, or a road, connecting two convex objects

III

Morphic languages do not convey the information as the language does,

they are more formation of patterns rules, such as the tiling rules (in mathematics, see works from [Penrouse]).

(in progress)