W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > September 2003

Re: problem with B1 B2

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 09:26:10 +0100
Message-ID: <3F545422.5040002@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: jjc@hpl.hp.com, www-webont-wg@w3.org

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> On further reflection, Jeremy's modified example is the killer.  I was
> trying to get by with too few roles, and inadvertently put in a way to get
> the equivalence.
> peter

I am not so sure about who is the victim of the 'killer'.

As far as I recall (not having reviewed my 'proof' recently) that is now 
dead. But I need to review the comprehension principles to understand 
whether it is the proof or the hypothesis that is flawed.

The old 'proof' needs the comprehension principles for intersectionOf and 
unionOf; I wonder if that technique can be extended to the rest of the 
'proof' and make it a proof.

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 04:31:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:55 UTC