John F. Sowa wrote:
> I mostly agree with your comments, but I'd like to clarify
> some points.
> JFS>> During the development of the Common Logic standard,
> >> Lenat had been asking for the kinds of extensions to CL
> >> that were added to IKRIS.
> PH> Actually the pressure came mostly from the Stanford IKL
> > laboratory, (01)
Pat of course means "KSL laboratory" (better, to avoid redundancy, just
> ...The old KIF 3.0 had a backquote, which I used to
> support contexts in conceptual graphs (which were influenced
> by Peirce's contexts, which have similar expressive power
> to McCarthy's contexts). I was very happy to get the 'that'
> operator in IKL, which can be used in the same way as backquote. (03)
It is semantically superior to backquote, however, especially for
representing intensional contexts. Intuitively, what we believe, fear,
desire, etc are propositions (or states of affairs, etc -- whatever
structured entity you take that-clauses to denote), not sentences. (04)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (06)