Re: Implications for KIF

• Mail folder: Interlingua Mail
• Next message: Robert Neches: "Re: Implications for KIF "
• Previous message: Key-Sun CHOI: "add my name"
• In-reply-to: sowa: "Implications for KIF"

Date: Thu, 13 May 93 12:52:32 -0400
From: schubert@cs.rochester.edu
Message-id: <9305131652.AA15445@ash.cs.rochester.edu>
To: cg@cs.umn.edu, interlingua@ISI.EDU, sowa@turing.pacss.binghamton.edu
Subject: Re:  Implications for KIF

> I wanted to translate nested CG contexts into quoted KIF expressions.
> For example, suppose we said "Tom owns a cat, and he believes that
> it is on a mat."  That might be represented in KIF by something like
> the following:
> 
>    (exists (?x cat)
>            (and (owns Tom ?x)
>                 (believes Tom `(exists (?y mat) (on ?x ?y))) ))
> 
> I said "something like" this expression, because there is a question
> about what to do with a variable like ?x inside a quoted expression,
> which refers to something quantified outside that expression.  There
> is no problem with ?y, since it is quantified and used within the
> quoted expression.
> 
Despite all our differences re models, I agree with John's preference
for option 3, i.e., the above representation instead of various "comma"
and "name" complications. I think quantifying-in is interpretable. -Len