W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > August 2002

Re: yet another non-entailment

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 14:00:36 +0200
To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <MABBLGKMPIJFCKFGDBEPAEBICBAA.jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>


>I'm not proposing anything complicated.  I would be happy with a format
>that is something like
>
>DESCRIPTION:
>
><text>
>
>RATIONALE:
>
><text>
>
>PREMISE:
>
>???
>
>CONCLUSION:
>
>???

I think nearly all this information is available (in a machine readable
form) and it's a small matter of programming to present it in the fashion
you suggest.

What we haven't had is "rationale" could you give an example, maybe for one
of your suggested tests (I guess any of the examples of a non-entailment in
Pat's model theory would suffice).

My fear is that the rationales would end up as vacuous (e.g. "Logical
consequence of the model theory"; this rationale is, in the medium term, a
requirement - if it isn't true either the model theory or test will need to
be changed).

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 27 August 2002 07:55:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:51 GMT