Re: TEST: Functional and InverseFunctional tests for approval

• From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
• Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 21:43:52 -0400 (EDT)
• To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
• Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
• Message-Id: <20020904.214352.63236304.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>

From: "Jos De_Roo" <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Subject: Re: TEST: Functional and InverseFunctional tests for approval
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 02:06:04 +0200


[...]

> I'm indeed not convinced about having
> existentials in inference rule conclusions
> (except for closed lists denoting sequences)
> 
> -- ,
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

Could you explain why you don't like existentials in inference rule
conclusions?  (This is a real question, I don't understand why it should
matter.)

peter

Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2002 21:44:02 UTC