W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > May 2009

Re: [RIF][FLD][PRD] Negation Framework Capturing Inflationary Negation

From: Christian De Sainte Marie <csma@fr.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 10:02:10 +0200
To: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
Cc: "Boley, Harold" <Harold.Boley@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca>, "RIF" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>, public-rif-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFB078839E.16AFC302-ONC12575AD.002BF3DB-C12575AD.002C24AF@fr.ibm.com>
********* NOTICE **********
My new email address at IBM is: csma@fr.ibm.com
My ILOG email address will not be forwarded after June 8
*****************************


Michael Kifer wrote on 05/05/2009 04:56:20:
> 
> I don't think we should include Nio in FLD. First, KBDSTRING is already 
an
> extensibility mechanism. Second, inflationary negation is not a logical
> negation and so it is not suitable for FLD unless FLD is extended to FRD 
(for
> all of RIF), which I don't see happening on the horizon.
> Finally, I think Nio is too cute and too uninformative. I'd propose 
iNeg.

+1 to all, including using INeg rather than Nio. INeg is, indeed, what the 
PRD TF agreed to use for PRD.

Christian

Sauf indication contraire ci-dessus:/ Unless stated otherwise above:
Compagnie IBM France
Siège Social : Tour Descartes, 2, avenue Gambetta, La Défense 5, 92400 
Courbevoie
RCS Nanterre 552 118 465
Forme Sociale : S.A.S.
Capital Social : 609.751.783,30 ?
SIREN/SIRET : 552 118 465 02430
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 08:03:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:08 GMT