W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: boolean operators and type errors

From: Dave Beckett <Dave.Beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 18:43:56 +0100
To: Jeen Broekstra <jeen@aduna.biz>
Cc: DAWG Mailing List <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1126201436.31716.1.camel@hedwig.dajobe.org>

More info, after a #swig discussion around
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/swig/2005-09-08.html#T17-02-24

Using the table from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_logic
writing 0 (Unknown) as E, 1 (True) as T and 2 (False) as F:

(Table1)
A       B   |   NOT A   A && B  A || B
-------------------------------------
E       E   |   E       E       E
E       T   |   E       E       T
E       F   |   E       F       E
T       E   |   F       E       T
T       T   |   F       T       T
T       F   |   F       F       T
F       E   |   T       F       E
F       T   |   T       F       T
F       F   |   T       F       F

which Bijan on IRC checked works with Demorgan's laws.

compare to current situation as described by ericP:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg/2005JulSep/0360.html
with the difference to above:

A       B  |  A || B
--------------------
T       T  |  T
T       F  |  T
F       T  |  T
F       F  |  F
T       E  |  T
F       E  |  F  (in table 1 gives E)
E       T  |  T
E       F  |  F  (in table 1 gives E)
E       E  |  E

which exactly matches the proposed changes in 0360.

So this change makes sense to me.


As to the & operator, this would need changing too if aligning with
this tri-logic was the method as E does not always propogate: in
table 1, F & E -> F and E & F -> F wheras we currently have any other
operator returning E on a type error on an argument.

Dave
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2005 17:44:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:24 GMT