W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org > July 2005

RE: car color defaults: a story about Scoped Negation As Failure/log:notIncludes

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 17:00:44 -0500
To: Gerd Wagner <wagnerg@tu-cottbus.de>
Cc: 'Michael Kifer' <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>, public-rule-workshop-discuss@w3.org
Message-Id: <1120773644.10719.85.camel@localhost>

On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 23:26 +0200, Gerd Wagner wrote:
> > In fact, every use of default negation *always* had a clear 
> > scope and I am not aware of anyone who (thoughtfully) advocated 
> > default negation and imagined otherwise.
> I guess Dan and others are concerned about making the
> scope explicit in the object language.

Yes, quite.

>  This is indeed
> an option that is not supported by traditional formal
> LP languages (although it is supported by Prolog's
> metaprogramming capabilities). But you (Michael) say 
> that FLORA-2 supports making the scope explicit, right? 
> Maybe you can give us an example how this looks like 
> in FLORA-2 and what it means in the underlying formal
> semantics? 

Yes, please.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 7 July 2005 22:00:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:48:33 UTC