Re: KIF review

• Mail folder: Interlingua Mail
• Next message: Timothy Finin: "CIKM-94: 3rd Conf on Info and Knowledge Mgmt, (papers due May 1)"
• Previous message: Matthew L. Ginsberg: "KIF review"
• In-reply-to: Matthew L. Ginsberg: "KIF review"

From: phayes@cs.uiuc.edu
Message-id: <199403251937.AA26231@dante.cs.uiuc.edu>
X-Sender: phayes@dante.cs.uiuc.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 1994 13:45:28 +0000
To: "Matthew L. Ginsberg" <ginsberg@t.uoregon.edu>, interlingua@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: KIF review

Thanks for the honest response, Matt. One little point: like many,
including myself at first, you friend assumes that 'standard' means 'the
one that people should use', and (s?)he has problems with this:

>I guess you mainly want to know what I think of it not as a KR language but as
>*the* KR language.  Like you (and many others) I see problems left, right, and
>center in settling on KIF 3.0 as the language for KR work. 

But that isnt what KIF is supposed to be at all: rather, it is being
proposed as a standard INTERlingua, ie something into (through) which other
languages can be (reasonably effectively) translated. This is a crucial
difference. In the above sense, KIF is not a KR language at all. 

Pat Hayes


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beckman Institute                                    (217)244 1616 office
405 North Mathews Avenue        	   (217)328 3947 or (415)855 9043 home
Urbana, IL. 61801                                    (217)244 8371 fax  	  

hayes@cs.stanford.edu  or Phayes@cs.uiuc.edu