On 2002-06-26 10:36, "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org> wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote: > >> >> On 2002-06-25 19:06, "ext R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com> wrote: >> >>> If darkness is specified by the addition of something to the graph, then >>> there is no way to avoid non-mon. We have been over this many times now. >>> Could we please stop reopening this issue? >>> >>> ... >>> >>> Darkness specification has to be *in the language*, not in a particular >>> file using the language. >> >> Would you say that the approach of using reification to express >> unasserted triples is "in the language" and thus avoids >> non-monotonicity? > > No. Why is it not in the language? Why is it non-monotonic? Patrick -- Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453 Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409 Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.comReceived on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 03:57:03 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:49:23 EDT