- From: Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:27:03 -0500
- To: Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se>
- CC: <public-rdf-star@w3.org>
Hi Olaf Not quite the same issue with literals. There are countably many literals, just as there are countably many possible IRIs and countably many RDF graphs. But if Peter is correct, there are uncountably many RDF* triples. An uncountable infinity is a lot more than a countable infinity. Pat > On Oct 14, 2020, at 8:00 AM, Olaf Hartig <olaf.hartig@liu.se> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > Right, there is no bound on the nesting depth. However, I don't think that > this may cause problems. > > By the way, the set of literals is infinite as well, so you have the same > issue with RDF triples. > > Olaf > > > On onsdag 14 oktober 2020 kl. 08:46:52 CEST Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >> I was looking at https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/ and got to wondering how >> many RDF* triples are there? It appears to me that there are an >> uncountable number of RDF* triples because there is no axiom of foundation >> for RDF* triples. >> >> So the following is an RDF* triple: >> >> _:a :p << _:a :p << _:a :p << _:a :p ... >> >> >> >> >> So an RDF* triple could have an infinite number of elements and so there is >> an uncountable number of RDF* triples. >> >> Does this cause any problems for RDF*? That I am not sure of. >> >> >> peter > > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2020 21:27:24 UTC