On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Rich Cooper wrote:
> Hi Seab, (01)
It's Sean; he typo'd. (02)
> Agreed. FOL is purely declarative. That is both its strength and its
>weakness as a communicable representation.
> People naturally mix declarative and procedural concepts because those are
>the ways they act in normal life, therefore it echoes in their conversations
>and attitudes through repeated situations.
> Purely declarative representations are great for some things, lousy for
The same triviality holds of any tool, of course. (04)
> Try teaching a kid to ride a bike declaratively, and you will quickly
>transition into How-To phrases instead of What-Is phrases. Try detailing a
>practice and procedure document without How-To declarative phrases and the
>other extreme comes into view.
> Both views are needed. Either one is like watching an old black-and-white
>movie in all black or all white. There isnít much to see. (05)
Then again, someone who's color-blind watching a full color movie might get the
same impression. Not much to see if you aren't capable of seeing it. (06)
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 (08)