- From: Jos de Bruijn <debruijn@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 16:47:00 +0200
- To: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- CC: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> 7. FLD [10] (10 mn) > > - What are the next steps and the priorities? I don't know whether we will go into so much detailed, but in any case, in my e-mail [1] I mentioned a few discussion points concerning FLD: - the logical connectives in the language do not include material implication and equivalence. I do not really understand the rationale for including certain connectives and not including others. - it seems to me that the classical negation is not sufficiently general to capture the notion of strong negation in logic programs. Do we want to capture this notion with FLD? Best, Jos [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008Jul/0166.html -- Jos de Bruijn debruijn@inf.unibz.it +390471016224 http://www.debruijn.net/ ---------------------------------------------- No one who cannot rejoice in the discovery of his own mistakes deserves to be called a scholar. - Donald Foster
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2008 14:47:04 UTC