So just to be clear. If a Statment S has the conditions: S.getModel() = M M.contains(S) = F
and we call S2 = S.changeLiteralObject( o2 ); we expect: S2.getModel() = M M.contains(S2) = T So changing the object of a statement has the side effect of putting the new statement in the model even if the original statement was not in the model. Claude On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Chris Dollin <chris.dol...@epimorphics.com>wrote: > On Tuesday, October 08, 2013 09:34:04 AM Ian Dickinson wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Chris Dollin > > <chris.dol...@epimorphics.com> wrote: > > > On Monday, October 07, 2013 07:44:43 PM Claude Warren wrote: > > >> Assume a Model M containing one Statement S composed of s,p,o. > > >> Assume M has a listener L > > >> Assume a Statement S composed of s,p,o that is of Model M but not in > Model > > >> M. > > >> > > >> the expected state is > > >> M.contains(S) = F > > >> S.getModel() = M > > >> s.getModel() = M > > >> p.getModel() = M > > >> o.getModel() = M > > > > > > Yes. > > I can't parse this: > > > > """ > > Assume a Statement S composed of s,p,o that is of Model M but not in > Model M > > """ > > "X is of model M" == "X.getModel() == M". > > "X is in M" == "M.contains(X)". > > So Claude's S above is a statement not in M but which has .getModel() == M. > > Chris > > -- > "You're down as expendable. You don't get a weapon." /Dark Lord of > Derkholm/ > > Epimorphics Ltd, http://www.epimorphics.com > Registered address: Court Lodge, 105 High Street, Portishead, Bristol BS20 > 6PT > Epimorphics Ltd. is a limited company registered in England (number > 7016688) > > -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web<http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
