Michael Kifer wrote: > (This came up in Stella's report on FLD, but the problem is in DTB.) > > There is a statement in DTB Sec 1.2.1: > > * rif:iri (http://www.w3.org/2007/rif#iri, ... ... ... A rif:iri > constant must be interpreted as a reference to one and the same > object regardless of the context in which that constant occurs. > > This last sentence is too informal. Worse, as far as I can see, it is > incompatible with first-order semantics. Obviously, no constant can > be interpreted by one and the same object in all possible worlds > (semantic structures) unless you impose restrictions, like we did for > data types. But I don't even think there is a reasonable set of > restrictions that is agreeable to everyone. Right, I don't remember when/why this was added, but I'd be fine to drop that last sentence. Would that do? Axel -- Dr. Axel Polleres Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway email: axel.polleres@deri.org url: http://www.polleres.net/Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 15:44:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:08 GMT