- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 10:25:35 +0100
- To: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
In Pat's impressive document I note the following: As far as I can tell the following two graphs (which I represent in a bastardized ntriple) entail one another: G1: <a> <b> <c>. G2: <a> <b> <c>. _:x <b> <c>. Have I understood this right? If so, is this desired? I am a little confused at the moment about it ... reading _:x <b> <c>. as existentially quanitifed then it seems trivial that G1 and G2 entail one another, whereas the interpolation lemma seems to be false. I might follow up on this later. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 17 August 2001 05:26:28 UTC