>I'm not seeing anything on the agenda for a telecon this week, so >I'm proposing to not have a telecon. Not that it needs a telecon,. but no doubt you have seen Herman's latest message by now. Im not sure what we can/should do about it. Privately I am working on a 'minimal edit' correction which makes the smallest possible change. I think I can get it to be a small restatement of the RDFS entailment lemma (along the lines I outlined in my reply to Herman) together with an explanatory paragraph; or else his additional rule and a short paragraph of explanation of its role and relationship to rules 6 and 10. If anyone has any opinions about which option would be the least awkward or preferable, please let me know. I have no idea what the appropriate way to handle a correction would be at this stage, however. If it would be best to do nothing, that would be fine with me: this is a very marginal case and unlikely to arise in practice. Pat -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32501 (850)291 0667 cell phayes@ihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayesReceived on Thursday, 20 November 2003 11:13:43 EST
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 20 November 2003 11:13:47 EST