Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontology, Information Models and the 'Real World':

[Waclaw Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Pat Hayes wrote:    (01)

>>> (forall (c)(ist c (that (rains))))
>>> In IKL, a relation with no arguments is itself a proposition, so one 
>>> could write it without the "that":
>>>
>>> (forall (c)(ist c rains))
>>
>> Just a syntactic feature?
> 
> Yes, essentially. It is way that the use/mention distinction applied to 
> propositions comes out in the IKL syntax.    (02)

So if
(that (rains))    (03)

is equivalent to
rains    (04)

, is
(that (dead osama))    (05)

equivalent to    (06)

"dead osama"
?    (07)

vQ    (08)

_________________________________________________________________
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    (09)