- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:37:22 +0000
- To: "Yosi Scharf" <syosi@mit.edu>
- Cc: public-cwm-bugs@w3.org
On 10/12/07, Yosi Scharf <syosi@mit.edu> wrote: > Right here is your problem. The meaning of ?s is that the > variable "s" is declared one level above. Oh dear! I had known but forgotten because it's counterintuitive to me that it should be easier to quantify a universal over its parent formula than the document's root formula. It would be interesting to run a survey of all N3 rules files to see what the actual deployed usage patterns are: are universals in sub-subformulae more likely to be quantified over their parent formulae, or over the document's root formula? My guess is the latter. If it's strongly the latter, perhaps it's worth considering changing this. I feel it's probably better to leave this bug open until such a survey is done. What do you reckon? > I'm not sure how cwm interprets when variables are declared > inconsistently like that. Weirness resulted. Yeah. I'd like to know how a log:/--think processor *ought* to handle strange sidecases like that, but it's academic really—some fun to take place should N3 ever be formalised. It may be regarded as not part of this bug report. -- Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/
Received on Monday, 29 October 2007 19:37:36 UTC