Re: the mechanism for signatures in RIF

> 
> I have an action to come up with a mechanism for specifying signatures
> without the need to assign Boolean signatures and arrow signatures to sorts.
> 
> Having a closer look at the Core proposal, I realized that the current
> proposal is sufficient. In the section "multi-sorted RIF logic" we see
> that Boolean and arrow signatures are assigned to symbols from Const. 
> This is exactly what we need.
> 
> A definition of the signature of a function-free FOL variant of RIF
> (let's call this RIF-FOL) might look something like, assuming that the
> sort Resource corresponds to the usual abstract domain:
> 
> Let URI be the set of URIs.

Let FOOBAR denote the set of all FOOBARs. Very informative...

I was hoping that you would read my msg addressed to
you, Francois, and Hassan, and will respond to the technical points.

This is the whole point: WHAT is a URI in the RIF language? A string?
Probably not.  If they are a special kind of symbol then they ARE a sort.


	--michael  


> The set Const \subseteq URI is partitioned into the subsets C, P_0, P_1,
> P_2,...
> where C is the set of constant symbols (i.e. each c\in C has an arrow
> signature Resource), and P_0, P_1, etc. are the sets of nullary, unary,
> etc. predicate symbols (each p\in P_i has a Boolean signature Resource^i).
> 
> 
> Best, Jos
> 
> -- 
> Jos de Bruijn,        http://www.debruijn.net/
> +43 512 507 6475         jos.debruijn@deri.org
> DERI                      http://www.deri.org/
> ----------------------------------------------
> Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise 
> to complex and intelligent behavior.  Complex 
> rules and regulations give rise to simple and 
> stupid behavior.
>  - Dee Hock
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 21 March 2007 15:50:47 UTC