- From: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:06:21 +0100
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: public-cwm-talk <public-cwm-talk@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFCD4F2EC3.E18E7179-ONC1257694.0057CC77-C1257694.00587E36@agfa.com>
Of course Dan, I was completely wrong.. :-( Good that we did not claim victory just yet :-) Will try again to have a correct proof output! Kind regards, Jos De Roo | Agfa HealthCare Senior Researcher | HE/Advanced Clinical Applications Research T +32 3444 7618 http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/ Quadrat NV, Kortrijksesteenweg 157, 9830 Sint-Martens-Latem, Belgium http://www.agfa.com/healthcare Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> 12/22/2009 02:37 PM To Jos De Roo/AMDUS/AGFA@AGFA cc public-cwm-talk <public-cwm-talk@w3.org> Subject Re: working on "A Model of Authority in the Web" On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 21:43 +0100, jos.deroo@agfa.com wrote: > Dan Connolly wrote: > [...] > > It's not sound to go from > > Exists x. P(x) -> Q(x) > > P(a) > > to > > Q(a) > > That is indeed unsound but there is no such rule > with an Exists x where x occurs in the conclusion. It's unsound even if x doesn't occur in the conclusion. Consider an example: is it sound to go from: There is one professor who, if he likes your work, you can get into the school. Professor Bob likes your work. to You can get into the school. ? -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 22 December 2009 16:07:01 UTC