- From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:49:23 -0400
- To: Chris Welty <cawelty@frontiernet.net>
- Cc: Francois Bry <bry@ifi.lmu.de>, edbark@nist.gov, public-rif-wg@w3.org
Chris Welty <cawelty@frontiernet.net> wrote: > > Michael Kifer wrote: > >> Michael Kifer wrote: > >> > >>> I said that normative rules imply that we must use some sort of a closed > >>> world assumption. Under the open-world assumption there is no useful way to > >>> distinguish between normative rules and deductive rules, but under the CWA > >>> there is. > >>> > >>> > >> I am not sure I can agree with this. I can very well imaginbe normative > >> rules not governed by a Closed World Assumption. > >> > > > > Francois, > > > > The above must be taken in the context of my earlier message > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2006Mar/0161.html > > where I *proved* that the rule set for which those normative rules act as > > constraints must have some sort of closed world assumption (more precisely, > > cannot use the normal first-order semantics). > > > > I must say that "proved" is a bit strong here. You have used in your > argument a particular definition of constraint that infallibly leads to > your conclusion. For those indoctrinated in the logical school (to > paraphrase your term), a constraint can just be an axiom and > satisfiability the test. This is not to say one is right or wrong, just > that your argument constitutes no proof. OK, ok. Of course, I made some assumptions. But to substantiate his claim, Francois had to provide a similarly rigorous argument, perhaps based on a different set of assumptions. Peter provided such an argument based on a different set of assumptions, although (per my earlier message) I think he didn't succeed in showing that constraints and regular formulas are somehow different in FOL. In his example the two sets of formulas are interchangeable. --michael > > > I did not say that normative rules must be "governed" by CWA, because I > > don't know what this might mean. > > > > If you think that my very short proof has a bug then please point this out. > > > > > > > > --michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Dr. Christopher A. Welty IBM Watson Research Center > +1.914.784.7055 19 Skyline Dr. > cawelty@frontiernet.net Hawthorne, NY 10532 > http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty > > >
Received on Tuesday, 25 April 2006 02:49:29 UTC