Re: SEM: Layering

> I should add my apologies to Pat's for having missed your message
>
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Apr/0200.html
>
> I, too, like it.

me too

> I comment on whether <false> is a useful RDF graph, extending the analysis.
>
> I think this message ends up very much in agreement ... (see end of
> message).

I agree with your <false> analysis Jeremy

As an aside...
I'm still wondering about what is giving us a license
to *get* a list (term) from it's description
(a thing is not the same as a description of the thing)
I have thought that is was dereferencing, but that
is wrong I think now (so no use/mention bug)
It's also not the fact that first/rest are unique
properties, at least I don't see that.
The best I can think of is that it is Mike's TINV mapping
of first/rest triples into a functional term cons(f,r)
For the moment we (still) keep the first/rest triples
asserted in our engine (as a matter of testing stuff)
but I'm feeling myself in a darkness

--
Jos

Received on Friday, 26 April 2002 09:56:38 UTC