W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > April 2001

Re: log:forAll makes sense? [was: Can we agree on triples ?]

From: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 13:03:40 -0700
Message-Id: <v04210109b6efdc2317e5@[130.107.66.237]>
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>At 03:52 PM 4/2/01 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>and the former is, say,
>>
>>       (log:forall '?a '(loves ?a mary))
>>
>>where log:forall is defined so that this expands to
>>
>>       (wtr '(forall (?a) (loves ?a mary)))
>
>Er, what's "wtr" meant to stand for here?

It is the KIF truth predicate. It asserts the proposition that the 
quoted string would mean if it were translated into KIF. (Actually it 
doesnt quite do that exactly, because to do it exactly would produce 
paradoxes; which is why it is W-tr, standing for Weakly TRue; but 
this is a technicality that we probably don't want to get into.)

This is a very obscure and powerful device usually used only for the 
most arcane and exotic uses. The fact that its use is mandated by RDF 
in order to express something as elementary as a universal quantifier 
is an illustration of what is wrong with the RDF model.

Pat Hayes

---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 3 April 2001 16:01:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT