W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

Re: Set Theory (NBG)

From: John D. Ramsdell <ramsdell@linus.mitre.org>
Date: 17 May 2001 13:01:49 -0400
To: "Ziv Hellman" <ziv@unicorn.com>
Cc: "Www-Rdf-Logic" <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Message-ID: <ogtu22jrjsy.fsf@divan.mitre.org>
"Ziv Hellman" <ziv@unicorn.com> writes:

> This is an extremely weak "set theory", if one can call it that, which
> hardly seems to require the full semantic power of NBG axiomatic set
> theory 

Correct, one could use Cohen's axioms for hereditarily finite set
theory just as well.  I should not mentioned a specific version of set
theory.  My question was simply why not restrict the models of RDF
statements to those consistent with an appropriate form of set theory?
This would allow reasoning systems to assume and use the axioms of the
selected set theory.  The semantics of collections would then be
familiar to all.

Received on Thursday, 17 May 2001 13:08:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:45:37 UTC