W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > October 2007

Re: Issue with top-down and bottom-up semantics

From: Bob MacGregor <bob.macgregor@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 09:19:49 -0700
Message-ID: <a0d0f8f70710260919l2c13c7actef05b3126b2af033@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Francis McCabe" <frankmccabe@mac.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
Frank,

You may well be right.  Implementationally, its not right, because we type
our
variables internally, and a variable shared across disjuncts might have
different
types in different disjuncts.  But I can't quickly come up with a
counterexample.

Cheers, Bob

On 10/26/07, Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@mac.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bob:
>   I think that your understanding of variables is consistent with the
> flat interpretation:
>
> Ex (B(x) \/ C(x))
>
> <->
>
> (Ex B(x)) \/ (Ex C(x))
>
> Similarly:
>
> Ax (B(x) /\ C(x) )
>
> <->
>
> (Ax B(x)) /\ (Ax C(x))
>
> A query can be viewed as the constructive refutation of the formula:
>
>  Ex Q(x)
>
> Frank
>
> On Oct 26, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Bob MacGregor wrote:
>
>
Received on Saturday, 27 October 2007 20:26:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:52 GMT