- From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 17:15:23 -0700
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>On Friday, July 27, 2001, at 04:49 PM, pat hayes wrote: > >>2. A non-empty subset P of R corresponding to properties > >non-empty: Does this mean that all RDF graphs must have at least one >property in them? We can't have an empty graph? No, but it does mean that any RDF 'interpretation' must have at least one property in it. You can't just have a set of resources with no properties. I don't really know why I put this condition in, it was a kind of knee-jerk mathematical reflex. It could be taken out without doing any damage. Maybe I will take it out, just in case someone wants to define a property-less interpretation for some obscure purpose. Pat --------------------------------------------------------------------- (650)859 6569 w (650)494 3973 h (until September) phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Monday, 6 August 2001 20:15:00 UTC