- From: Wagner, G.R. <G.R.Wagner@tm.tue.nl>
- Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 14:09:05 +0200
- To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Cc: www-rdf-rules@w3.org
> The classical approach is to think of queries as negated > and think of the entire inference process as finding a contradiction. > That is a very 'logical' viewpoint which many find unnatural, It is not just unnatural but also not very general, because in many formalisms/logics the principle underlying this approach, viz proof by refuting the negation (or "reductio ad absurdum"), is *not* valid! Although it is quite common to view the inference process in logic programs in this unnatural way (apparently, because many people like to be 'logical'), there is absolutely no need to do so. It is conceptually much more adequate (more natural and more general) to view the inference process as being based on simple rule application (detachment). -Gerd
Received on Monday, 24 September 2001 08:09:07 UTC