W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-rules@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Is n3 a rules language or a logic language?

From: Wagner, G.R. <G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 21:09:43 +0100
Message-ID: <AA2E843B3FC96349BF60350202650BE9257396@tmex1.tm.tue.nl>
To: www-rdf-rules@w3.org

> On December 11, Wagner, G.R. writes:
> > Under the minimal model semantics, a rule does no longer have the
> > same intended models as the corresponding implication. This is easy
> > to see: consider the rule q :- ~p. It has only one intended (i.e.
> > minimal) model, which may be expressed by the set {q}, whereas the
> > corresponding material implication ~p -> q, which is equivalent to q
> > v p, has two intended/minimal models: {q} and {p}.

What I said does not hold for the minimal model, but for the 
stable model semantics. Sorry.

Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2002 15:09:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:53:10 GMT