Re: SEM: semantics for current proposal (why R disjoint V?)

Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

> A pointer to the literature should not be met with arguments,
> even in jest, about ``intimidation''.


Well, I guess it's my turn to apologise then.
My remark was made purely in jest.
Apologies if it offended anyone.

Frank.
    ----

Received on Friday, 22 March 2002 11:40:08 UTC