- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:14:39 -0700
- To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> > In danger of making another mistake .... > > > > I didn't quite see how the interpolation lemma worked when the LHS has > > anonymous nodes. > > > > How does it get the following entailment > > > > > > _:x <b> <c> . > > > > > > entails > > > > _:y <b> <c> . > >I just see that we have a bug in our stuff... >for > _:x <b> <c>. |=> _:y <b> <c>. >we assert LHS and query it with RHS >and i think we should query with > {_:y <b> <c>} log:forAll _:y. >and then there is a match found with > {_:x <b> <c>} log:forSome _:x. >(i have to think about that, and try...) That seems right to me. The log:forAll on the RHS tells the reasoner it is free to substitute anything for the variable, right? > > Sorry if I'm being stupid. > >What I learned via one of the RDF lists is > "the wise searches for the truth > while the stupid thinks he found it" >so I think you are very wise! Amen. Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- (650)859 6569 w (650)494 3973 h (until September) phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 27 August 2001 15:13:42 UTC