- From: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 11:50:17 +0200
- To: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Cc: Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>, Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
+1 to keep EmptyCollection
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
<soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Luc Moreau <l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Question: do we keep EmptyCollection?
>
> With a binary member relation and no completeness, there would be no
> other way to describe an empty collection. (before you could say
> hadMembers(c, {}) ). We then only allow characterising collections
> with 1 members or more, which is a bit odd.
>
> I say keep. In almost all collection systems, the empty collection is a prime.
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
> School of Computer Science
> The University of Manchester
>
--
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.groth@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group
Artificial Intelligence Section
Department of Computer Science
VU University Amsterdam
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2012 09:50:49 UTC