On 2 Apr 2012, at 18:54, "Jim McCusker" <mccusj@rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@rpi.edu>> wrote: On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk<mailto:L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote: Jim, Ok, so 1. can you confirm that two alternates may not have any overlap in time? Two copies of the same book, where copy A was destroyed before copy B was made. Ok. 2. Is alternate reflexive or not? With time based definition it seems it is. With specialisation based definition it seems it may not be (depends whether any entity is always a specialisation of some entity) I think that it's okay for alternate to be reflexive. The controversy was whether or not specialization is. Reflexivity is not obvious with your definition. Since for alternateOf (e,e) to hold, e needs to be specialisation of an entity. Is it? Jim -- Jim McCusker Programmer Analyst Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics Yale School of Medicine james.mccusker@yale.edu<mailto:james.mccusker@yale.edu> | (203) 785-6330 http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu PhD Student Tetherless World Constellation Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute mccusj@cs.rpi.edu<mailto:mccusj@cs.rpi.edu> http://tw.rpi.edu
Received on Monday, 2 April 2012 18:15:43 UTC