Re: ANSI standards and knowledge representation

• Mail folder: SRKB Mail
• Next message: John F. Sowa: "Abstract syntax"
• Previous message: Gio Wiederhold: "Re: ANSI standards and knowledge representation"
• In-reply-to: Erik Sandewall: "ANSI standards and knowledge representation"

Date: Sat, 20 Aug 94 22:36:09 EDT
From: Gio Wiederhold <gio@arpa.mil>
To: Erik Sandewall <ejs@ida.liu.se>
Cc: ansi@t.uoregon.edu, gw@db.stanford.edu (gio direct)
Subject: Re: ANSI standards and knowledge representation
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 18 Aug 94 17:41:10 +0200
Message-id: <CMM.0.90.10.777436569.gio@next>
Sender: owner-srkb@cs.umbc.edu
Precedence: bulk

Sorry forthe incomplete message, my communication (from Idaho ...) went n the
blink.

Any practical language needs extension over FOL.
The variety of possible extensions is not enumerable

A language that would aloow principled extensions would be attractive.
To handle extensions would of course require a commonly agrre way for
extensions.

The extensions should be labelled, so that receiver can determine if
it/he/she cab handle the  extesion (like KQML ontologies)

An interesting resarch issue is the determination which extensions are
complementary, redundant, conflicting ...

Gio