On 2/22/2012 9:04 AM, henson graves wrote:
> My choice of logic, as you can see from a
> diagram in the paper is type theory such as developed by Lambek and Scott.
> This is a version of higher order logic in that it has terms which from a
> full higher order logic. It can be expressed as a deduction system and as a
> FOL theory with a rich type structure. I also developed and implemented a
> type theory logic around the same time which was derived from Lawvere's FOL
> axioms for a topos. It was called Algos. I have been able to embed large
> parts of SysML into this version of type theory. (01)
I think that's an interesting approach. I have a high regard for the
research on type theory, and I'm glad that you have found it useful. (02)
But my point about proactive standards still stands. When your tools
become successful in the marketplace, then it would be appropriate
to consider them as standards. (03)
John (04)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (05)
|