W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > July 2003

Re: TEST: 6 of 7: empty universe example,

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 09:35:51 -0400
Message-Id: <p05200f5abb4590e22699@[10.0.1.3]>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org

At 12:59 PM +0300 7/24/03, Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>Mehrdad:
>>  In OWL-DL (as in FOL), the universe of the interpretation is always
>>  required to be a non-empty set.
>
>
>that was true in the LC documents; however a careful reeading of the current
>editors draft of the direct semantics does not indicate that the
>interpretation of owl:Thing must be non-empty.
>
>Jeremy


I'm pretty agnostic on this one, but is there some benefit to 
allowing this odd case - hard for me to believe it will ever come up 
in practice, and it does seem to be confusing people -- Peter, why 
the change?
  -JH

-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***
Received on Thursday, 24 July 2003 09:35:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT