W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > April 2002

Re: A Single Foundational Logic for the Semantic Web

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:27:31 -0400
To: sandro@w3.org
Cc: phayes@ai.uwf.edu, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <20020430082731K.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: A Single Foundational Logic for the Semantic Web 
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 22:22:16 -0400

> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > Perhaps I'm misreading it; if someone can present a
> > > paradox using only log:forSome, log:forAll, and log:implies, then I
> > > think I (and I'll venture TimBL and others) will be very interested.
> > > [Hrm, I guess you'll have trouble until an n3->n-triples conversion is
> > > written down.  It's in public e-mail between me and Tim; I'll dig it
> > > up if anyone seriously wants to try.  The idea is to use
> > > log:Conjunction and daml:List to assemble an n3 Formula.]
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > You have to be more precise here.  If *all* I can use is
> > log:forSome, log:forAll, and log:implies then I can't even make any
> > statement (because I don't have the . to finish the statement).
> 
> [ quiet curses at this medium, where the reply chains always come from
> the parts of my e-mail which are the least well explained...  but I
> guess that's why the reply chains come from there.... ]
> 
> I'm sorry for getting you interested and not giving you proper
> information.   I really didn't expect anyone to take that part of my
> message so seriously so quickly.  
> 
> I see several different styles of Horn logics for RDF.  I think the
> kind I'm most comfortable with is typified by this example of mine[1],
> but more of the community seems comfortable with n3/cwm, so let's
> stick to that.  I'm going to try to restrict their imprecises
> semantics for quantification to something cleaner.  Alas, you seem to
> have looked at an out-of-date version of cwm's logic (if Falsehood was
> still there), not the one I linked from my first message in this chain
> [2].  Can you tell me where you saw log:Falsehood?

n3:Falsehood is in http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Notation3.html
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 08:27:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:42 GMT