- From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:05:12 -0400
- To: naudts guido <naudts_vannoten@yahoo.com>
- Cc: cwm <public-cwm-talk@w3.org>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q? "C=E9sar" _Varona?= <cesar.varona@ptbsl.com>
The actual syntax is @forAll and @forSome (for several years now,
though cwm accepts the old form).
The
There is an explanation of the semantics
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/N3Logic
An excerpt:
Any formula, (including the root formula), may have a set of
universal variables. These are indicated by @forall declarations.
The scope of the @forAll is outside the scope of any @forSome.
If both universal and existential quantification are specified for
the same context, then the scope of the universal quantification is
outside the scope of the existentials:
{ @forAll <#h>. @forSome <#g>. <#g> <#loves> <#h> }.
means
∀<#h> ( ∃<#g> (( <#g> <#loves> <#h> ))
Does this help?
Tim BL
On Oct 4, 2005, at 7:05, naudts guido wrote:
>
> Hallo,
> Does anyone know of an N3 example where log:forSome is
> used and where the query is not possible with
> log:forAll?
> I ask this question because I'm trying to understand
> what the precise semantics are of log:forSome.
> Greetings,
>
> Guido Naudts
> Lic. zoologie
> Ir.informatica
> Adviseur Department of Justice
> Secretarisdreef 5
> 2288 Bouwel
> Belgium
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 18:05:30 UTC