- From: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:01:31 +0300
- To: ext Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- CC: "ext R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
On 2002-06-26 10:36, "ext Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote:
>
>>
>> On 2002-06-25 19:06, "ext R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If darkness is specified by the addition of something to the graph, then
>>> there is no way to avoid non-mon. We have been over this many times now.
>>> Could we please stop reopening this issue?
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Darkness specification has to be *in the language*, not in a particular
>>> file using the language.
>>
>> Would you say that the approach of using reification to express
>> unasserted triples is "in the language" and thus avoids
>> non-monotonicity?
>
> No.
Why is it not in the language?
Why is it non-monotonic?
Patrick
--
Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
Received on Wednesday, 26 June 2002 03:57:03 UTC