Re: [UCR] RIF needs different reasoning methods

> P.S. I am not averse to the idea that a ruleset could have a standard XML tag 
> for "reasoner-specific annotations", where the content of that element is not 
> standardized.  This would allow an exporting engine to capture any parametric 
> guidance with the ruleset, so that when the recipient is another copy of the 
> same engine, it can profit from it, while any other engine can safely ignore 
> it.  (But the XML schema for that can get really messy.)
> 
> -- 
> Edward J. Barkmeyer                        Email: edbark@nist.gov


I agree. We can't go beyond that. There are many strategies to ensure
termination of a proof strategy. 
I don't think it is a useful exercise for RIF to even try to catalogue or
standardize these strategies.


	--michael

Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:11:02 UTC