RE: ACTION-219: review of CORE (more)

> >>> Not being "consistent with classical semantics" doesn't mean
> >>> much for what we are trying to do. No important computational
> >>> formalism I'm aware of is "consistent with classical semantics".

> ...
 
> So I take this to be similar to Allen's arrogation of the term  
> "logic" to mean only classical logic.

> ...
 
> So I respectively request that people refrain from making such  
> bombastic claims, regardless of their personal perceptions of the  
> merits of those claims.

Yes, Bijan, you are right. 

But sometimes it is tempting making a strong claim to 
counter a misconception (namely that true logic is 
classical logic and therefore that's what we should 
try to use/impose in/to the world of computation).

-Gerd

Received on Wednesday, 14 February 2007 13:07:27 UTC