Dear Martin and Wolfgang, > > >> Therefore, the described destination is an instance of E53 Place which > P89 falls within (contains) the instance of E53 Place the move P7 took > place at. > > P26(x,y) ⇒ (∃z) [E53(z) ∧ P7(x,z) ∧ P89(y,z)] > > > > I assume that P26 behaves in the same way as P7, ie. there are some > attestations and one can infer the best approximation. >
> Why do you assume that? > I assume he assumes consistency in our reasoning and this is a predicate that indicates where something is at a moment, like P7! So it seems like a legit assumption. Do I get your gist Wolfgang? Cheers, George
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
