- From: Seth Russell <seth@robustai.net>
- Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 13:48:11 -0700
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, "Drew McDermott" <drew.mcdermott@yale.edu>, <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
From: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>
> > [1] http://robustai.net/mentography/implicationOfxor.gif
>
> Isn't an "exclusive or" just stating something as being a disjoint
> union? Same thing: exclusive/disjoint union/or. But I think you just
> mean that they are pairwise disjoint, rather than that A is a union of
> B and C.
I guess I have as much trouble understanding strings of words as you guys
seem to have understanding diagrams. Maybe we can resort to another kind
of diagram ... one that has been around for years and is universally
understood --- Venn diagrams. So I have drawn a Venn diagram of the
situation [2]. You can see that {B not C, D, E} holds; whereas {D not E}
does not. A is just our domain of discource.
[2] http://robustai.net/mentography/bnotc.jpg
Seth
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 22:09:15 UTC