Re: yet another non-entailment

>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 UTC