[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Role of definitions (Remember the poor human)

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:49:32 -0500
Message-id: <p06110488c1f7c5bfe4e6@[]>
>...I think it is potentially confusing, and at
>the least out of keeping with standard usage in logic, to call
>anything proof theoretic "semantics".    (01)

In computer science, programs have operational semantics.  I read a 
paper a few years ago describing an inference engine the author 
wrote, which said "The semantics of our engine is what it computes."    (02)

A proof theory for a logic would correspond to operational semantics 
for a theorem prover based on that proof theory.    (03)

Logicians might not use the word "semantics" for this, but computer 
scientists do.    (04)

K    (05)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (06)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>