From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> Subject: Re: problem with B1 B2 Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:32:00 +0100 > > > The goal of this message is to show that the B1 B2 approach is not > invalidated by our current difficult example: Again I spoke too soon. My belief about the example was not well-founded. My comprehension of how the OWL comprehension principles work has degraded. :-) [Jeremy's demonstration needs a fix or two, but appears to work. ...] > I believe that the technique used in the above demonstration can be > generalized and embedded within the inductive structure of the previous > flawed proof. However, this is non-trivial. Definitely non-trivial. > Jeremy peterReceived on Friday, 5 September 2003 08:22:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:02 GMT