W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cwm-talk@w3.org > April to June 2008

Re: Nice to see http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/diagrams/n3/venn.svg (false notation)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 17:29:33 -0500
To: jos.deroo@agfa.com
Cc: timbl@w3.org, public-cwm-talk@w3.org
Message-Id: <1210199373.4651.455.camel@pav.lan>

On Sun, 2008-05-04 at 20:58 +0200, jos.deroo@agfa.com wrote:
> but I wonder wether using false instead of {} wouldn't be better,
> like
> {?X owl:disjointWith ?Y. ?Z a ?X. ?Z a ?Y} => false.
> No?


I was never quite comfortable with Euler's use of {}
to denote false.

Meanwhile... I used a different representation for false
when I was doing something similar. Perhaps that
was just because the 'false' syntax wasn't introduced

for reference...

Playing around with N3, OWL, and inconsistency

 Equality and inconsistency in the rules layer
 by connolly on Mon, 2006-06-05

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 7 May 2008 22:30:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:01:05 UTC