Re: Constraints explained

On Mar 13, 2006, at 11:22 AM, Michael Kifer wrote:

> Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de> wrote:
>>
>> PS: I do not follow you in the non-FOL of ICs...
>>
>
>
> I formally pointed out something that many people don't realize: The 
> use of
> constraints implies that the rulesets to which these constraints apply 
> must
> not have an FOL semantics.
>
> This is significant to understand, since if we include constraints in 
> Phase
> 1 then already in Phase 1 we must talk about the difference between 
> FOL and
> LP semantics.

+1, 2, 3, 4, 5

:)

Cheers,
Bijan.