On 10/18/2010 02:23 PM, Ian Bailey wrote:
> Hi John,
> You wrote:
> ... people said "Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn."
> Which is true. CL (pick any dialect you like) is difficult to work with.
Which (just to be clear) is to say that first-order logic is difficult
to work with.
> it weren't so awkward, more people might use it for commercial applications.
> Until that day, people will work with more productive, intuitive notations,
> that unfortunately are somewhat less formal - they still work, mind you.
So again, just to be clear, your claim is that no notation for
first-order logic can be as productive as the more intuitive notations
of which you speak.
> Maybe the CL/FOL community need to employ some HCI folks to help them
> develop the next generation of modelling notation, because what's there in
> CL now just isn't going to cut it with the average developer or data
But now I'm confused. Your claim is that it is first-order logic per se
that is the problem. If that is true, then it would make no sense for
the CL/FOL to work with HCI folks to develop another notation, since it
would be yet another FOL notation -- and hence yet another CL dialect
and, hence, a notation that (according to you) no average developer or
data modeler is ever going to work in. (01)
Perhaps first-order logic isn't for the "average developer or data
modeler" the way that a lot of useful higher mathematics isn't for the
"average engineer"? (02)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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)