- From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:06:56 +0100
- To: aswartz@upclink.com
- Cc: Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> > I think/hack that both anonymous *terms* can be *unified* > > which is NOT the same as equality > > Then your hack only seems to works when we can unify anonymous > terms, or they have some sort of UniqueProperty attached. How do > we solve the general case? There was some related discussion in the telecon this afternoon, and I was kind of unable to explain my point...(I'm really hopeless in that respect) The thing about anonymous nodes is that they are ***variables*** if they would be constants, we would be able to identify them with ***URI constants*** Now they are actually existentially quantified variables, something like: there exists an _:a or (using existing vocab): this log:forSome _:a So I think we should say that *explicitly* is the testresults (and in the model theory) (the general case?) -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 12:07:12 UTC