Re: INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR LOGIC: CSMF

• Mail folder: SRKB Mail
• Next message: sowa: "Re: INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR LOGIC: CSMF"
• Previous message: John F. Sowa: "Difference between logics and theories"
• In-reply-to: David McAllester: "INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR LOGIC: CSMF"

Date: Sat, 10 Sep 94 14:24:25 EDT
From: sowa@turing.pacss.binghamton.edu (sowa)
Message-id: <9409101824.AA14401@turing.pacss.binghamton.edu >
To: dam@ai.mit.edu, tony@ontek.com
Subject: Re:  INTERNATIONAL STANDARD FOR LOGIC: CSMF
Cc: E.Hunt@cgsmtp.comdt.uscg.mil, bhacker@nara.gov, cg@cs.umn.edu,
        duschka@cs.stanford.edu, genesereth@cs.stanford.edu,
        interlingua@isi.edu, jksharp@sandia.gov, msingh@bcr.cc.bellcore.com,
        msmith@vax2.cstp.umkc.edu, roger@ci.deere.com, scott@ontek.com,
        sharadg@atc.boeing.com, skperez@mcimail.com,
        sowa@turing.pacss.binghamton.edu, srkb@cs.umbc.edu,
        fritz@rodin.wustl.edu
Sender: owner-srkb@cs.umbc.edu
Precedence: bulk

We are NOT proposing FOL as the semantics for KIF and CGs.  We ARE
proposing a hierarchy of metalanguages, each of which is first-order,
but each of which is capable of talking about the syntax, truth conditions,
rules of inference, and model theory of the one below it.

The HOL system, which calls itself higher-order, is essentially doing
the same thing we are.  In fact, it is actually doing much less, since
they only permit one level of metalanguage.

John Sowa