[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Requirements of computer language semantics

To: <edbark@xxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Richard H. McCullough" <rhm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:54:21 -0700
Message-id: <37ABE6F89C654D13AB5ADA7768D9EE85@rhm8200>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ed Barkmeyer" <edbark@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Requirements of computer language semantics    (01)

>> Yes, but the basic primitives of core CL are very simple
>> and very general.  Defining multiple logics by the mapping
>> to one standard logic with a solid model theory automatically
>> insures that all of them are mutually compatible. 
> This is certainly a laudable goal, but
> (1) it wasn't the topic I thought we were discussing, and
> (2) it only works for FOL languages.  For logic programming languages, 
> you just don't have all the necessary semantic concepts in CL.  (And I 
> don't know what kind of language mKR really is.)
After reading "Logic for Interoperability" in the "IKL Guide", it appears
that IKL is a subset of today's mKR language, because I don't enforce
the restrictions described in that section.
***** to be continued as I read further *****    (02)

Dick    (03)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (04)

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