On Mar 29, 2012, at 6:32 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > On Tuesday, March 27, 2012, Graham Klyne wrote: > > Personally, I prefer the choice that it is reflexive; i.e. specializationOf(a,a) always holds. As I recall, that seems to simplify some other inferential machinery. > > Yes, it solves the turtles-all-the-way problem last highlighted by Tim in this thread, if we also made specializationOf(x,y) imply alternativeOf(x,y), as the unknown top-level y can be specializationOf itself. However I think we dismissed the need for such an inference. > > Intuitively it sounds confusing to be an alternative to yourself, or a specialisation of yourself, but as we see above there could be special cases where you would want (a subproperty of) specializationOf/alternativeOf to be reflective, so I would simply say +1 for the conservative say-nothing approach for reflexivity. +1 -Tim > > -- > Stian Soiland-Reyes > > > -- > Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team > School of Computer Science > The University of Manchester
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2012 12:15:50 UTC