- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:24:44 -0600
- To: jos.deroo@agfa.com
- Cc: public-cwm-talk <public-cwm-talk@w3.org>
On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 16:52 +0100, jos.deroo@agfa.com wrote: > tuning, am able to reproduce via swap: [...] Thanks for confirming my results. > and am also attaching the 4 proofs found by eye [...] > They are not immediately checking due eye's "bnode to univar rewriting > in the rule premis" > and I wonder if it is realistic that check.py can cope with that... Good question. It does seem like a sound transformation... is there any chance you could make it an explicit proof step? Then perhaps we could add support for that sort of step to check.py. > Thanks Dan and this indeed feels like a nice exercise :) :) -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Monday, 21 December 2009 16:24:47 UTC