On Dec 14, 2009, at 10:48 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
> ...
> In fact, most of the differences between Common Logic and the old
> KIF result from the requirements for making Common Logic support
> the semantics of RDF. (01)
I believe that is in fact false but it *could* have been true. :-) In fact, by
my recollection, the differences arose, first, from the realization that we
needed to move to an abstract syntax that could encompass most any existing or
proposed language and, second, the need for a completely type free syntax and
semantics to accommodate the syntactic anarchy one finds on the web. Pat might
recall differently, but I don't recall RDF playing any actual motivational role
in CL's development and that it was a happy accident that RDF syntax could be
so easily be represented as a CL (sub)dialect and that a semantics for RDF
could be built so readily from ideas out of CL semantics. (02)
-chris (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)
|