Re: Contexts? (again)

Miles Sabin wrote:

>Sandro Hawke wrote,
>  
>
>>My current suggested truth predicate is WellFormedAndTrue, where
>>being well-formed includes being able to be re-written in a
>>truth-preserving manner to a form without negated self-references;
>>this is (as far as I can tell) what KIF3 had, before they took it out
>>as being unnecessary for the intended apps.
>>    
>>
>
>Doesn't this just give us another variant of the liar?
>
>  This statement is not WellFormedAndTrue
>
I think that paradoxes can be avoided in RDF applications by not 
allowing truth predicates to reference the graph which contains them. 
 So you can say anything about a graph inside the graph, but you just 
can't talk about whether it is true or false.   I believe that 
<http://robustai.net/sailor/paradox.txt> expressess the liar in 
syntactically valid RDF.    Can anyone express the liar in 
*syntactically valid  RDF* by  making up your own truth predicate, but 
assert that predicate outside the RDF enclosure of which it references?  
 Of course we need to be able to have a uri for a graph to even start to 
talk about doing that.  

language: semenglish
<http://robustai.net/sailor/paradox.txt>;
    type Paradox;
    author (seth russell).