- From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 22:26:12 -0400
- To: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
[Dan Connolly] >to which I replied, 23 May 2002 22:08:16 -0500: DC> it's monotonic, in that the more you understand, the fewer DC> interpretations are models. You can't rule out models by DC> failing to understand something. > The example above is not a counterexample of this claim > that partial understanding is monotonic. > According to Sowa in his book published in 2000 (p. 376-377), if additional knowledge "blocks" previously permissible conclusions, that's __non-monotonic__. Help me to understand this apparent discrepancy, please, because it appears directly opposite to the DC> quote above. I realize that "interpretation" is not the same as "permissible conclusion", but I don't see how these two statements about nonmonotonicity are compatible. Cheers, Tom P
Received on Thursday, 30 May 2002 22:26:08 UTC