You answered; they didn't
fritz@rodin.wustl.edu (Fritz Lehmann)
Reply-To: cg@cs.umn.edu
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 93 03:25:06 CDT
From: fritz@rodin.wustl.edu (Fritz Lehmann)
Message-id: <9310120825.AA26250@rodin.wustl.edu>
To: phayes@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: You answered; they didn't
Cc: boley@dfki.uni-kl.de, cg@cs.umn.edu, chrikey1.ucthpx@f4.25.fidonet.org,
interlingua@isi.edu
>>Dear Pat Hayes, phayes@cs.uiuc.edu
>> When an email message gets no answer I
>>never know whether it was too boring, too lame to warrant a
>>response, or too convincing to question.
>Im sorry: I thought I had replied to all your messages. Please forgive my
>rudeness if I did not. A proper reply to this one will take a little longer
>but it will come.
>Pat Hayes
>PS it may of course be that the point it makes is so convincing that
>everyone is left speechless. :-)
Ah NO, NO-- Pat, you've answered my mail! I didn't mean you. I was talking
about the KIF/CG Powers That Be who have not presented their good reasons for
limiting KIF and CG to being pure First Order rather than higher- and mixed-
order. Sorry for the ambiguity. It must be as described in your PS. I keep
coming up with new things one might want to say in AI which (I think) aren't
expressible in First Order .
Fritz Lehmann