W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > February 2007

Re: [TED] Core Overview Section and Validation Appendix Added

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 08:03:01 -0500
To: Adrian GIURCA <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
Cc: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>, Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2031.1171717381@cs.sunysb.edu>


> Dear Michael,
> 
> Michael Kifer wrote:
> > Adrian, addressing just two of your comments.
> >
> >   
> >> I don't agree. If there are two different roles for the terms involved 
> >> in the equality then they are different. We need to distinguish between 
> >> the left part and the right part just if we consider to use the equality 
> >> in a non-commutative way (as an assignment, for example).
> >>     
> >
> > Let's not get carried away. We are talking logic, not Pascal.
> > What assignment are you talking about in logic?
> >   
> I guess I was not sufficient explicit. I don't understand why we have 
> two different roles namely lhs and rhs. This introduce distinctions of 
> the equality members such that if we want to express commutativity (the 
> logical case) we need a constraint in the model. We don't need any role 
> there. The "assignment" was probably a bad example.

I understood your point. I was just commenting on the assignment thing.


	--michael
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2007 13:06:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:37 GMT