Re: What is "the serious bug in entailment semantics" found by J. Perez"?

On 8 Aug 2006, at 15:31, Seaborne, Andy wrote:
> I can only find this as:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-dawg-comments/ 
> 2006Jun/0052

yeah, it is the same example.

> The first thing is to decide what the desirable right answer should  
> be.
>
> S(?q = <a>) seems desirable from a user's perspective.

It is desirable since this is the way implementations work (subgraph  
matching): this was for me the prerequisite in finding a semantics -  
i.e., it should reflect what implementors have done.
That's why I would propose to change the semantics while keeping the  
prerequisite that the implementation should be based on subgraph  
matching.

--e.