- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 15:36:55 -0400
- To: Mark Cidade <marxidad@marxidad.com>
- Cc: "'Garret Wilson'" <garret@globalmentor.com>, "'Story Henry'" <henry.story@bblfish.net>, "'Semantic Web'" <semantic-web@w3.org>
I think these are different things. owl:Nothing is a *class identifier* (whose class extension is the empty set), not something that can be used as the value of arbitrary properties, which is what I think Garret is looking for. --Frank On Oct 20, 2007, at 3:00 PM, Mark Cidade wrote: > > What about owl:Nothing? > > http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#owl_Nothing > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: semantic-web-request@w3.org [mailto:semantic-web- > request@w3.org] On > Behalf Of Garret Wilson > Sent: October 20, 2007 12:40 PM > To: Story Henry > Cc: Semantic Web > Subject: Re: representing null in semantic frameworks > > > Right. rdf:nil is an instance of rdf:List that is used to say > something > like, "the next list of this linked list is really no list at > all" (i.e. > L rdf:rest rdf:nil; see <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_nil>). > > So in other words RDF created a special null value that is only valid > for use with rdf:List. Does anyone know of any meeting minutes or > other > documents that unveil why the WG didn't create a more general null > that > you could use for anything? > > Thanks, Henry. > > Garret > > Story Henry wrote: >> There is something close. rdf:Lists terminate with a null I think. >> >> Henry >> >> On 20 Oct 2007, at 18:15, Garret Wilson wrote: >> >>> >>> As RDF evolved, was there any discussion on adding an rdf:null >>> resource---that is, a resource that represents no resource at all? >>> >>> One expected response: "My child, you're thinking like a programmer >>> again---what you really want to do is assert the absence of any >>> assertions regarding a particular subject and predicate, or you want >>> to assume a closed world and just don't assert anything at all", or >>> something like that---and I appreciate this point of view to some >>> extent. >>> >>> But as a practical matter, let's say we have a list of baseball game >>> scores. Wouldn't it be convenient for the resource at index 3 to be >>> null to indicate that there was no score that week because there was >>> a tornado that canceled the game? >>> >>> I'm not necessarily looking for a big online discussion. Just a >>> brief >>> pointer to any reading on this subject would help. I'm sure there >>> must have been some discussion of null over the development history >>> of RDF. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Garret >> > >
Received on Saturday, 20 October 2007 19:37:27 UTC