- From: Ginsberg, Allen <AGINSBERG@imc.mitre.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:16:49 -0500
- To: <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
- Cc: <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Hi Michael, I am just playing devil's advocate here. > Is it really that simple? Nothing is simple! > - What does it mean to "make an assumption"? To assume P is to add P to the current reasoning context. > - What is the model theory of "making an assumption"? There is no model theory of "making an assumption", nor is there a need for one: what propositions to take as true in a given context can often be a matter of pragmatics, not a concern for semantics. Semantics tells you what follows from the assumptions you have made. > In what sense what you have in mind is more classical than, say, the > stable model semantics? As far as I understand it, stable model "semantics" is basically a procedural add-on to classical semantics involving an implementation of the closed-world-assumption. It is, if you will, a way of implementing the assumption that everything that you know nothing about is false. Classical semantics makes no such assumption. > What if you have recursion through negation? Abandon ship!
Received on Monday, 12 February 2007 20:17:31 UTC