- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 23:49:58 -0500
- To: Adrian GIURCA <giurca@tu-cottbus.de>
- Cc: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>, Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Adrian, addressing just two of your comments. > I don't agree. If there are two different roles for the terms involved > in the equality then they are different. We need to distinguish between > the left part and the right part just if we consider to use the equality > in a non-commutative way (as an assignment, for example). Let's not get carried away. We are talking logic, not Pascal. What assignment are you talking about in logic? > Another comment on semantics: TV is a partial order so I believe this > prepares the future extensions including the management of uncertain > information. This approach seems to be not a fuzzy one (using different > implications like Goguen, Lukasiewicz etc). Is this true? Anyway for me > this is the right direction. May be some people can comment on that. I think this doesn't preclude fuzzy implication. The order can be total (partial doesn't preclude total). Of course, the notion of truth value of a rule will be different, but it will still be an extension of the core. --michael
Received on Saturday, 17 February 2007 04:50:10 UTC