Re: "Semantics" vs. "No Semantics"

>From: jos.deroo@agfa.com
>Subject: Re: "Semantics" vs. "No Semantics"
>Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 00:49:07 +0200
>
>> >From: jos.deroo@agfa.com
>> >Subject: Re: "Semantics" vs. "No Semantics"
>> >Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 23:51:49 +0200
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> >I agree that there are many ways to approach semantics.  While I'm 
not 
>> 
>> >> >sure I would characterize model-theoretic semantics as more or less 

>> >> >abstract than other approaches, I do fear that a model-theoretic 
>> >> >semantics will be of little help
>> >> >to the implementors of RIF translators and associated rule engines. 

>> >> >Looking at other W3C formal semantic specifications for guidance, I 

>> find 
>> >> >http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-semantics/ to be a good approach. 
Formal 
>> >> >XQuery semantics are specified using RULES.  Why can't we specify 
RIF 
>> >> >semantics using rules? 
>> >
>> >How would that be different from a proof theory?
>> >
>> >> We could even write those rules using RIF.
>> >
>> >> I like that idea very much!
>> >
>> >You mean using rules that we haven't given meaning to to give meaning 
to
>> >the rules?  I suspect that there are some potential pitfalls there.
>> 
>> Yes, there are, but when respecting
>> [[
>>   whenever, in a sentence, we wish to say something
>>   about a certain thing, we have to use, in this
>>   sentence, not the thing itself but its name or
>>   designation -- Alfred Tarski
>> ]]
>> the pitfalls can be overcome I believe.
>
>I don't see how the quote addresses the problem I pointed out.
>
>> It not complete but I'm trying to apply this at
>> http://eulersharp.sourceforge.net/2006/02swap/
>> and I think it works across JSON, Prolog and N3.
>
> Which part of which file of this directory is germane to this 
discussion?

I was just spinning down from Gary's point
"Why can't we specify RIF semantics using rules?"
to some elaborations on implementing rules interpreters
using rules languages; it is in the latter sense that
http://eulersharp.sourceforge.net/2006/02swap/
was mentioned.

-- 
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2006 08:54:09 UTC