- From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:10:30 -0400
- To: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org, public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org wrote on 06/29/2005 11:48:57 AM: > > > * Christopher Welty > | > | I don't know anything about topic maps, but it sounds like from your > | syntactic example: > | > | [a] is-bankrupt(barings-bank : company) > | > | that you have some notion of "strong typing" (aka "sorts" in logic), > | that is, there are unary predicates that are somehow more essential > | than others. > > I don't know enough about logic to answer this, but we certainly know > unambiguously which predicate instances are unary and which ones are > not. Obviously we are speaking different languages here. A predicate is unary if it takes one argument. In [a] I understood both "is-bankrupt" and "company" to be unary predicates with some syntactic sugar to make it easier to express. If that's not what they are, then what I proposed won't work. -Chris
Received on Thursday, 30 June 2005 03:10:59 UTC