Rich Cooper wrote: (01)
> HERE IS THE IMPORTANT PART:
> Given two statements detected by the sensors, there is absolutely no
> reason to choose AND over OR as the interpretation. (02)
I sure hope Rich isn't in the business of building automata. Consider a
security system with two sensors, one of which notices whether there is
a person in a restricted area, and the other notices whether there is an
authorized personnel badge in the same restricted area. (03)
I want the security rule to read:
IF person detected AND NOT badge detected, THEN Sound Alarm. (04)
By comparison:
IF person detected OR NOT badge detected, THEN Sound Alarm
will probably produce continuous cacophony. ;-) (05)
So, yes, there is absolutely a very strong reason to choose AND over OR
in interpreting the sensor input. (06)
-Ed (07)
P.S. With apologies to Rich, this strikes me as an excellent candidate
for Hatlo's Inferno. (for those of you old enough to remember) ;-) (08)
--
Edward J. Barkmeyer Email: edbark@xxxxxxxx
National Institute of Standards & Technology
Manufacturing Systems Integration Division
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8263 Tel: +1 301-975-3528
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-8263 FAX: +1 301-975-4694 (09)
"The opinions expressed above do not reflect consensus of NIST,
and have not been reviewed by any Government authority." (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (011)
|