On Jun 3, 2009, at 11:52 AM, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
> Maybe "experience" is a better word.
> I think JK wants to actually "use" the IKL language, perhaps as a
> "thinking" tool? (01)
IKL is a logical language (well, a class of logical languages) for
representing declarative information rigorously. Like standard first-
order logic, it is not a "tool" in the sense of, say, Protege that
comes with built-in mechanisms for representing and reasoning upon
class hierarchies and the like that might help one to think about and
formalize the structure of information in a specific domain. (I take
it you envision mKR as a tool in this sense as well, its lack of both
a semantics and an underlying reasoning mechanism notwithstanding.) (02)
> That is a problem, since Pat Hayes tells me that there are no IKL
> tools of any kind -- no compiler, interpreter, (03)
It makes no sense whatever to talk about compiling or interpreting (in
the machine language sense) a purely logical language like IKL. Your
confusion over fundamental issues like this is one of the reasons
behind the exasperation occasionally expressed at your posts on this
list. I reiterate John's advice: Do your homework. (04)
> syntax checker, (05)
A syntax checker for IKL might be useful for debugging large files of
IKL sentences, but the syntax of IKL is quite simple for anyone
familiar with KIF or its Common Logic counterpart CLIF. (06)
> IDE, (07)
Vide comment re interpreters/compilers. (08)
> and apparently no mailing list. (09)
Questions/comments about IKL can be directed to the Common Logic
mailing list (since it is an extension of CLIF). (010)
Chris Menzel (011)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Christopher Menzel
> To: [ontolog-forum]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 8:42 AM
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] IKL mailing list for discussions?
>
> On Jun 2, 2009, at 7:30 PM, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
>> JK
>>
>> It's a work in progress [some bugs, some omissions], but
>> ke -ikl
>> translates mKR to IKL..
>> It will give you some insight into the IKL language.
>
> Your translator can't possibly give insight into IKL when you are
> relying upon IKL's semantics to provide the missing semantics for
> mKR. The IKL guide, together with the ISO Common Logic spec, are
> the places to go for insight into IKL.
>
> Chris Menzel (012)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (013)
|