Re: [BLD] Frame without slot/value pair?

Michael Kifer wrote:
> 
> [...]  Formulas like t[] are also useful. If they are allowed, their
> semantics is that the object t exists (without testing any of its
> properties).

Hmmm. I wonder how useful it is really.

In order to check the existence of object t, you have to denote it in 
some way: How do you denote an object without either asserting or 
checking its existence already in the process (thus removing any need to 
check it further)?

Actually, the only use I found for a formula like t[] is to allow the 
retraction of an individual without having to allow retracting TERMs as 
well as ATOMICs (in RIF-PRD). But that's a different can of worms...

Christian