On Mar 30, 2010, at 5:50 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
>
> I'm not suggesting that anything change. And traditional KR isn't only about
>mathematical logic. It's also about interactive explanation, patterns,
>linguistics, perceptions, and many other areas needing improved automation for
>knowledge acquisition and rendering.
>
> Limiting expression is every bit as bad an idea as starting with a bad design
>and filling it in with good pieces. It's the refusal to use any specific kind
>of expression that I am objecting to. Use whatever method works for you, and
>if it leads you to novel discoveries, then the whole world is better off. (01)
I'm not sure where you got the idea that anyone was proposing the sort of
refusal you describe. John's point, and mine, was only that it would be nutty
to use Nand and Nor in place of the usual boolean connectives in a language for
knowledge engineering. But if you *want* to use Nand and Nor, given the usual
booleans it is trivial to introduce them by definition (and conversely, of
course). (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)
|