From sowa at bestweb.net Fri Nov 6 15:48:14 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [CL] Question about namecharsequence and enclosedname Message-ID: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> A CLIF enclosedname is enclosed in double quotes, but a namecharsequence is not enclosed in double quotes. According to definition A.2.2.7 in the CL standard, the following string is a legal namecharsequence: www.jfsowa.com/pubs And A.2.2.5 would allow the following string as a legal enclosedname: "www.jfsowa.com/pubs" Question: Are these two names treated as equivalent or distinct? I believe that it would cause a great deal of confusion to treat them as distinct because it is hard to remember which special characters in a name do not require quotes and which ones do require quotes. For example, the symbols called char happen to be the printable characters on most US keyboards. But on keyboards in other countries, the position occupied by '$' is replaced by other currency symbols, which are not permissible in namecharsquence. There are other ASCII symbols on the US keyboards, which are replaced by different symbols on other keyboards. It would be very hard for anyone to remember which ones are valid in a namecharsequence and which ones are permissible only in enclosed names. For those reasons, I recommend that the following clarification be added to definitions A.2.2.5 and/or A.2.2.7: Any name character sequence is considered to be identical to the enclosed name that consists of the same character sequence preceded by a name quote and followed by a name quote. This convention is common in many computer languages and systems. It means that if you're not certain whether a particular string is a valid name, there is no harm in enclosing it in quotes. It is also important for supporting dialects other than CLIF, which may have more restrictions on which characters are permitted in names -- especially for people who may happen to use both CLIF and those other languages. John Sowa From phayes at ihmc.us Mon Nov 9 22:11:06 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:11:06 -0600 Subject: [CL] Question about namecharsequence and enclosedname In-Reply-To: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> References: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> Message-ID: On Nov 6, 2009, at 3:48 PM, John F. Sowa wrote: > A CLIF enclosedname is enclosed in double quotes, but a > namecharsequence is not enclosed in double quotes. > > According to definition A.2.2.7 in the CL standard, the following > string is a legal namecharsequence: > > www.jfsowa.com/pubs > > And A.2.2.5 would allow the following string as a legal enclosedname: > > "www.jfsowa.com/pubs" > > Question: Are these two names treated as equivalent or distinct? Equivalent, as far as the logic is concerned. The only purpose of the double quote syntax is to allow things like "Patrick (Pat) Hayes" which contain spaces and parentheses, to be used as CLIF identifiers. > > I believe that it would cause a great deal of confusion to treat them > as distinct because it is hard to remember which special characters > in a name do not require quotes and which ones do require quotes. Well, its pretty simple. The only characters that absolutely require an enclosed name are whitespace (space, newline, tab, etc.) or the two parentheses, all of which are otherwise 'lexical breaking' characters, and a double quote character in the first position of the string, because that will trigger the enclosedname syntax itself. Everything else can just be used 'as is'. But I take your point. > For example, the symbols called char happen to be the printable > characters on most US keyboards. But on keyboards in other countries, > the position occupied by '$' is replaced by other currency symbols, > which are not permissible in namecharsquence. Yes, well, we had to choose a lexical syntax based on ASCII or one based on Unicode. Obviously, non-ascii strings are best done using a unicode-based lexical syntax. (Didn't we have that as an option in the CLIF standard? It was there in one of the drafts, maybe it got simplified out.) > There are other > ASCII symbols on the US keyboards, which are replaced by different > symbols on other keyboards. It would be very hard for anyone to > remember which ones are valid in a namecharsequence and which ones > are permissible only in enclosed names. > > For those reasons, I recommend that the following clarification > be added to definitions A.2.2.5 and/or A.2.2.7: > > Any name character sequence is considered to be identical to > the enclosed name that consists of the same character sequence > preceded by a name quote and followed by a name quote. Yes. We should say this, as it is true :-) Good call. Pat > > This convention is common in many computer languages and systems. > It means that if you're not certain whether a particular string > is a valid name, there is no harm in enclosing it in quotes. > > It is also important for supporting dialects other than CLIF, > which may have more restrictions on which characters are permitted > in names -- especially for people who may happen to use both CLIF > and those other languages. > > John Sowa > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From rschulz at sonic.net Mon Nov 9 23:33:38 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 21:33:38 -0800 Subject: [CL] Question about namecharsequence and enclosedname In-Reply-To: References: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <200911092133.38667.rschulz@sonic.net> On Monday November 9 2009, Pat Hayes wrote: > On Nov 6, 2009, at 3:48 PM, John F. Sowa wrote: > > ... > > > For example, the symbols called char happen to be the printable > > characters on most US keyboards. But on keyboards in other > > countries, the position occupied by '$' is replaced by other > > currency symbols, which are not permissible in namecharsquence. > > Yes, well, we had to choose a lexical syntax based on ASCII or one > based on Unicode. Obviously, non-ascii strings are best done using a > unicode-based lexical syntax. (Didn't we have that as an option in > the CLIF standard? It was there in one of the drafts, maybe it got > simplified out.) As I read it, that option remains. From ISO/IEC 24707:2007(E): A.2 CLIF Syntax ? 2: "The syntax is written to apply to ASCII encodings. It also applies to full Unicode character encodings, with the change noted below to the category nonascii." A.2.2.4 Quoting within strings "Certain character sequences are used to indicate the presence of a single character. nonascii is the set of characters or character sequences which indicate a Unicode character outside the ASCII range. "NOTE For input using a full Unicode character encoding, this production should be ignored and nonascii should be understood instead to be the set of all non-control characters of Unicode outside the ASCII range which are supported by the character encoding. The use of the \uxxxx and \Uxxxxxx sequences in text encoded using a full Unicode character repertoire is deprecated." > ... > > Pat > > > ... > > > > John Sowa Randall Schulz From sowa at bestweb.net Tue Nov 10 07:06:33 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 08:06:33 -0500 Subject: [CL] Question about namecharsequence and enclosedname In-Reply-To: References: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <4AF96559.4030406@bestweb.net> Pat, Thanks for the clarification. That is what I had thought, and I had assumed it when I specified the CGIF lexical rules. But I am now writing a paper about Peirce's existential graphs (in which I use a subset of CGIF called EGIF). And as I was rereading the CL document, I realized that the point wasn't clear (or at least not emphasized). Since we are planning an update to the standard, I suggest that we throw in a comment that clarifies the point. Re ASCII: The first 128 ASCII characters, which are the only ones needed for CLIF, CGIF, and XCL, are identical to the first 128 Unicode characters. So they can be called by either name. By the way, how is hurricane Ida affecting your part of the world? John From phayes at ihmc.us Tue Nov 10 10:20:15 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:20:15 -0600 Subject: [CL] Question about namecharsequence and enclosedname In-Reply-To: <4AF96559.4030406@bestweb.net> References: <4AF4999E.9000905@bestweb.net> <4AF96559.4030406@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <119A683E-DB79-415C-BC8C-D234EEABA26E@ihmc.us> On Nov 10, 2009, at 7:06 AM, John F. Sowa wrote: > Pat, > > Thanks for the clarification. That is what I had thought, and I had > assumed it when I specified the CGIF lexical rules. But I am now > writing a paper about Peirce's existential graphs (in which I use a > subset of CGIF called EGIF). And as I was rereading the CL document, > I realized that the point wasn't clear (or at least not emphasized). > > Since we are planning an update to the standard, I suggest that we > throw in a comment that clarifies the point. Good idea. Harry has passed the baton, I gather. > > Re ASCII: The first 128 ASCII characters, which are the only ones > needed for CLIF, CGIF, and XCL, are identical to the first 128 > Unicode characters. So they can be called by either name. > > By the way, how is hurricane Ida affecting your part of the world? Hardly at all. It downgraded to a 'storm' and now a 'depression'. It got a bit windy last night and we had a lot of rain, but nothing worth losing sleep over. I slept :-) Pat > > John > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From sowa at bestweb.net Wed Nov 11 14:55:52 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:55:52 -0500 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names Message-ID: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> While we're thinking of adding some clarifications to the CL standard, I'd like to see answers to the following questions: 1. Is a numeral enclosed in double quotes considered identical to a numeral not enclosed in quotes? Is (= "123" 123) true? 2. Is a quoted string enclosed in double quotes considered identical to a quoted string without the double quotes? Is (= "'abc'" 'abc') true? As a precedent, HTML treats "123" and 123 as identical. I'd like to add the following clarification (or its equivalent in other wording): Any namecharsequence, numeral, or quoted string is considered identical to the enclosedname that consists of the same sequence of characters preceded and followed by a name quote. John From phayes at ihmc.us Wed Nov 11 18:48:27 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:48:27 -0600 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> Message-ID: On Nov 11, 2009, at 2:55 PM, John F. Sowa wrote: > While we're thinking of adding some clarifications to the CL standard, > I'd like to see answers to the following questions: > > 1. Is a numeral enclosed in double quotes considered > identical to a numeral not enclosed in quotes? > > Is (= "123" 123) true? > > 2. Is a quoted string enclosed in double quotes considered > identical to a quoted string without the double quotes? > > Is (= "'abc'" 'abc') true? Hmm, good questions. I confess I had not even thought of these examples. This isn't what the enclosed-name syntax is intended for, but I agree we need to make the answer clear. I agree we should have these identities assumed, as you suggest. The only workable alternative would be to make these syntactically illegal, and I don't like that idea. > > As a precedent, HTML treats "123" and 123 as identical. > > I'd like to add the following clarification (or its equivalent > in other wording): > > Any namecharsequence, numeral, or quoted string is considered > identical to the enclosedname that consists of the same sequence > of characters preceded and followed by a name quote. OK. But not, of course, an enclosed name. Pat > > John > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From rschulz at sonic.net Wed Nov 11 18:56:49 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:56:49 -0800 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <200911111656.50226.rschulz@sonic.net> On Wednesday November 11 2009, John F. Sowa wrote: > While we're thinking of adding some clarifications to the CL > standard, I'd like to see answers to the following questions: > > 1. Is a numeral enclosed in double quotes considered > identical to a numeral not enclosed in quotes? > > Is (= "123" 123) true? > > 2. Is a quoted string enclosed in double quotes considered > identical to a quoted string without the double quotes? > > Is (= "'abc'" 'abc') true? Aren't these answered by the fact that the string and the number are interpreted names while the enclosed names are interpretable names? In other words, no, they are not necessarily coreferrent. > ... > > John Randall Schulz From phayes at ihmc.us Wed Nov 11 19:47:31 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:47:31 -0600 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <200911111656.50226.rschulz@sonic.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <200911111656.50226.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: <9BE46695-FCC1-470B-9110-84EA44FE52A4@ihmc.us> On Nov 11, 2009, at 6:56 PM, Randall R Schulz wrote: > On Wednesday November 11 2009, John F. Sowa wrote: >> While we're thinking of adding some clarifications to the CL >> standard, I'd like to see answers to the following questions: >> >> 1. Is a numeral enclosed in double quotes considered >> identical to a numeral not enclosed in quotes? >> >> Is (= "123" 123) true? >> >> 2. Is a quoted string enclosed in double quotes considered >> identical to a quoted string without the double quotes? >> >> Is (= "'abc'" 'abc') true? > > Aren't these answered by the fact that the string and the number are > interpreted names while the enclosed names are interpretable names? In > other words, no, they are not necessarily coreferrent. Ahh, yes, good point. And indeed, this might be useful, if someone for some exotic reason wants to use a numeral or a quoted string to denote something other than the fixed interpretation imposed upon it by CLIF. So I now go back on my previous response, and would stick with the interpreted/interpretable distinction. This also retains the sense of these as being in a sense quoted. Sorry, John. :-) Pat > > >> ... >> >> John > > > Randall Schulz > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From sowa at bestweb.net Fri Nov 13 14:42:44 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 15:42:44 -0500 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <9BE46695-FCC1-470B-9110-84EA44FE52A4@ihmc.us> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <200911111656.50226.rschulz@sonic.net> <9BE46695-FCC1-470B-9110-84EA44FE52A4@ihmc.us> Message-ID: <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> Pat and Randall, RRS> Aren't these answered by the fact that the string and the > number are interpreted names while the enclosed names are > interpretable names? PH> Ahh, yes, good point. And indeed, this might be useful, if someone > for some exotic reason wants to use a numeral or a quoted string to > denote something other than the fixed interpretation imposed upon it > by CLIF. PH> Sorry, John. Actually, I don't have strong feelings about that point. But I did want to be certain that the issue didn't fall through the cracks. The point I am most concerned about is that a namecharsequence that happens to be enclosed in double quotes would be treated as identical to one that did not have the double quotes; i.e., the following should be true: (= "abc" abc) Let's make a note (mental or digital) that we should clarify these points with a few brief comments in a revision of the CL document. John From rschulz at sonic.net Fri Nov 13 14:48:55 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:48:55 -0800 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <9BE46695-FCC1-470B-9110-84EA44FE52A4@ihmc.us> <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <200911131248.55273.rschulz@sonic.net> On Friday November 13 2009, John F. Sowa wrote: > Pat and Randall, > > ... > > The point I am most concerned about is that a namecharsequence > that happens to be enclosed in double quotes would be treated > as identical to one that did not have the double quotes; > i.e., the following should be true: > > (= "abc" abc) > > ... I certainly concur with this. > John Randall Schulz From clynch at ontoreason.com Fri Nov 13 14:45:59 2009 From: clynch at ontoreason.com (Cecil Lynch) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 12:45:59 -0800 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <200911111656.50226.rschulz@sonic.net> <9BE46695-FCC1-470B-9110-84EA44FE52A4@ihmc.us> <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> Message-ID: <000801ca64a2$4f3f52b0$edbdf810$@com> Hi John, I wonder if there are exceptions to this, specifically for "true" and true. At least in the OWL editors, these are treated differently where true is a Boolean value and "true" is not. Cecil -----Original Message----- From: cl-bounces at philebus.tamu.edu [mailto:cl-bounces at philebus.tamu.edu] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 12:43 PM To: Discussion of ISO Common Logic Standard (ISO/IEC 24707) Subject: Re: [CL] Another point about enclosed names Pat and Randall, RRS> Aren't these answered by the fact that the string and the > number are interpreted names while the enclosed names are > interpretable names? PH> Ahh, yes, good point. And indeed, this might be useful, if someone > for some exotic reason wants to use a numeral or a quoted string to > denote something other than the fixed interpretation imposed upon it > by CLIF. PH> Sorry, John. Actually, I don't have strong feelings about that point. But I did want to be certain that the issue didn't fall through the cracks. The point I am most concerned about is that a namecharsequence that happens to be enclosed in double quotes would be treated as identical to one that did not have the double quotes; i.e., the following should be true: (= "abc" abc) Let's make a note (mental or digital) that we should clarify these points with a few brief comments in a revision of the CL document. John _______________________________________________ CL mailing list CL at philebus.tamu.edu http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl From rschulz at sonic.net Sat Nov 14 08:36:48 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 06:36:48 -0800 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <000801ca64a2$4f3f52b0$edbdf810$@com> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> <000801ca64a2$4f3f52b0$edbdf810$@com> Message-ID: <200911140636.48283.rschulz@sonic.net> On Friday November 13 2009, Cecil Lynch wrote: > Hi John, > > I wonder if there are exceptions to this, specifically for "true" and > true. At least in the OWL editors, these are treated differently > where true is a Boolean value and "true" is not. > > Cecil But CLIF does not have a separate notation for verum and falsum. You use (and) and (or), resp. Randall Schulz From sowa at bestweb.net Sat Nov 14 16:01:06 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:01:06 -0500 Subject: [CL] Another point about enclosed names In-Reply-To: <200911140636.48283.rschulz@sonic.net> References: <4AFB24D8.3000606@bestweb.net> <4AFDC4C4.30800@bestweb.net> <000801ca64a2$4f3f52b0$edbdf810$@com> <200911140636.48283.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: <4AFF28A2.5070504@bestweb.net> Cecil and Randal, CL>> I wonder if there are exceptions to this, specifically for >> "true" and true. At least in the OWL editors, these are treated >> differently where true is a Boolean value and "true" is not. RRS> But CLIF does not have a separate notation for verum and falsum. > You use (and) and (or), resp. These points get into issues with languages other than the CL dialects in the annexes of ISO/IEC 24707. There are two kinds if issues involved in this thread: 1. Clarifying the CL standard by adding a few informative comments in the next revision. 2. Changing the definitions in the CL standard so that we smooth the road bumps that may create misunderstandings for readers who are familiar with other common systems. Cecil's point was about the use of quotes in OWL. The question about quotes arises in different ways with each dialect. For example, "and" is a valid enclosed name in CLIF, but without the quotes, it cannot be used as a namecharsequence because it is reserved for the Boolean operator. In CGIF, however, there is no explicit and-operator because all the nodes in the same area are implicitly "anded". John From cross at kojeware.com Mon Nov 16 11:53:40 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:53:40 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples Message-ID: Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop tools for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? Cameron. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phayes at ihmc.us Tue Nov 17 12:43:10 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:43:10 -0600 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop > tools for Common Logic? Not by me, I'm afraid. > Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? I'm working on one right now, an ontology for quantities, units and dimensions, which will be written in CLIF as the normative standard. Hopefully something nontrivial will be available in a few months time. Pat > > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhalcomb at hsinfosystems.com Tue Nov 17 13:39:00 2009 From: jhalcomb at hsinfosystems.com (Jay Halcomb) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:39:00 -0800 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples References: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> Message-ID: <608FD489C33A42D981BE8D9959D8AAB0@owner1888863da> >> Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/download.html Cheers, Jay ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Hayes" To: "Discussion of ISO Common Logic Standard (ISO/IEC 24707)" Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:43 AM Subject: Re: [CL] CL tools and examples > > On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > >> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop >> tools for Common Logic? > > Not by me, I'm afraid. > >> Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? > > I'm working on one right now, an ontology for quantities, units and > dimensions, which will be written in CLIF as the normative standard. > Hopefully something nontrivial will be available in a few months time. > > Pat > > >> >> Cameron. >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > From cjm at berkeleybop.org Tue Nov 17 16:36:56 2009 From: cjm at berkeleybop.org (Chris Mungall) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:36:56 -0800 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> Hi Cameron I know there are some closed-source tools out there, but I'm not aware of any general purpose open source toolkit. There is this: http://sourceforge.net/projects/common-logic/ But it's empty, I'm hoping Bill Anderson and the Ontology Works folk will put something there someday. I have written a CLIF parser (in Prolog). It's probably not comprehensive. I use it for converting hand-authored CL ontologies to Prover9 syntax. It works for the subset of CLIF that I have used, which is to say quite minimal. It may well break on other texts. http://github.com/cmungall/cltools/ Cheers Chris On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop > tools for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples > described using CLIF? > > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl From sowa at bestweb.net Tue Nov 17 18:39:00 2009 From: sowa at bestweb.net (John F. Sowa) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:39:00 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> References: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> Message-ID: <4B034224.2090609@bestweb.net> Various open-source tools have been written that use the CGIF dialect. At VivoMind, we have been using CGIF for a wide range of software, but our current business model is to work on contracts, for which we develop custom applications. Eventually, we intend to produce tools that will be available with a wide range of formats, including both CGIF and CLIF. Unfortunately, we don't have a hype machine behind us that can match the Semantic Webbers. John From idbaxter at semanticdesigns.com Tue Nov 17 22:51:38 2009 From: idbaxter at semanticdesigns.com (Ira Baxter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:51:38 -0600 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples [heur][faked-from][spf] References: Message-ID: <012701ca680a$d6d5fbf0$3501a8c0@semanticdesigns.local> Semantic Designs has a full CLIF parser/AST-builder/prettyprinter for SD's DMS transformation system (http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Products/DMS/DMSToolkit.html) The transformation system allows one to write surface-syntax transformations that can apply to CLIF instances, providing the ability to directly apply rewriting rules. Internal APIs allow one to carry out arbitrary procedural transformations on the CLIF instances, and/or to generate CLIF from other sources. We have not applied this to any specific task. NASA/JPL has used CLIF as an fact-encoding target for program representations. Contact nicolas.rouquette at jpl.nasa.gov Ira D. Baxter, Ph.D, CTO www.semanticdesigns.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cameron Ross" To: Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 11:53 AM Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples [heur][faked-from][spf] > Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop tools > for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described using > CLIF? > > Cameron. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > From ali.hashemi at utoronto.ca Wed Nov 18 03:01:52 2009 From: ali.hashemi at utoronto.ca (Ali Hashemi) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:01:52 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5ab1dc970911180101p2b1e6920l62ffaff864634552@mail.gmail.com> Hi Cameron, I wrote up a relatively extensive ontology for partially ordered sets in CLIF (or to be more specific, a semi-lattice of ontologies for the poset conceptual domain). It made extensive use of the "cl-module" and "cl-import" statements, but due to the unavailability of CL reasoners, I avoided quantifying over named relations, even though it would have made expressing non-conservative extensions more natural. The picture here( http://tinypic.com/r/vgk8cz/6 ) shows the semi-lattice of theories for this conceptual domain. As a side note, due to no accessible tools, I ended up translating the ontologies into Prover9/Mace4 syntax to test consistency and play around with automatic model generation. While it's not yet persistently online, I can provide you with a copy of the poset ontology hierarchy (from partial orders & comparability graphs all the way down to boolean lattices), if you are interested. Moreover, a number of CLIF ontologies should be appearing at http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca *relatively *soon. Ali On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop tools > for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described using > CLIF? > > Cameron. > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Tue Nov 17 12:48:34 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:48:34 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> References: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> Message-ID: Great! Any chance of getting a preview so that I can test a parser I'm developing? Cameron. On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > > On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > > Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop tools > for Common Logic? > > > Not by me, I'm afraid. > > Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? > > > I'm working on one right now, an ontology for quantities, units and > dimensions, which will be written in CLIF as the normative standard. > Hopefully something nontrivial will be available in a few months time. > > Pat > > > > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Tue Nov 17 13:15:58 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:15:58 -0500 Subject: [CL] Clif white space scanning rules Message-ID: The lexical rules for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer to the "white" lexical rule. This results in nondeterminism in the "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" lexical rules. I recall that the lexical rule for "white" was modified at some point to include alternatives for temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the comment alternatives that are causing the nondeterminism in the quoted string rules. Is there any harm is revising the spec so that "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" refer to "whitechar" instead of "white"? This will remove the nondeterminism without having to jump through hoops. Cameron. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Tue Nov 17 13:50:37 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:50:37 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <608FD489C33A42D981BE8D9959D8AAB0@owner1888863da> References: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> <608FD489C33A42D981BE8D9959D8AAB0@owner1888863da> Message-ID: Hi Jay, Ah yes PSL... There was a discussion on the list some time ago about PSL and CLIF (http://philebus.tamu.edu/pipermail/cl/2007-June/001136.html). I'm wondering if there are now any examples demonstrating the "whole text / phrase / module / importation / exclusion melange" as outlined in that thread. Thanks though, Cameron. On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Jay Halcomb wrote: > >> Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? > > http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/download.html > > Cheers, > Jay > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pat Hayes" > To: "Discussion of ISO Common Logic Standard (ISO/IEC 24707)" < > cl at philebus.tamu.edu> > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 10:43 AM > Subject: Re: [CL] CL tools and examples > > > > > > On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > > > >> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop > >> tools for Common Logic? > > > > Not by me, I'm afraid. > > > >> Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? > > > > I'm working on one right now, an ontology for quantities, units and > > dimensions, which will be written in CLIF as the normative standard. > > Hopefully something nontrivial will be available in a few months time. > > > > Pat > > > > > >> > >> Cameron. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> CL mailing list > >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu > >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Tue Nov 17 17:38:26 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:38:26 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> References: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> Message-ID: <562036211902925927@unknownmsgid> Thanks for the info Chris. I'm resurrecting work I had done to implement a CLIF parser using ANTLR. I'll release this under an open source license when it's complete. Cameron. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 17, 2009, at 5:36 PM, Chris Mungall wrote: > Hi Cameron > > I know there are some closed-source tools out there, but I'm not > aware of any general purpose open source toolkit. > > There is this: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/common-logic/ > > But it's empty, I'm hoping Bill Anderson and the Ontology Works folk > will put something there someday. > > I have written a CLIF parser (in Prolog). It's probably not > comprehensive. I use it for converting hand-authored CL ontologies > to Prover9 syntax. It works for the subset of CLIF that I have used, > which is to say quite minimal. It may well break on other texts. > > http://github.com/cmungall/cltools/ > > Cheers > Chris > > On Nov 16, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > >> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to >> develop tools for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant >> examples described using CLIF? >> >> Cameron. >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl From cross at kojeware.com Wed Nov 18 09:12:52 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:12:52 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <5ab1dc970911180101p2b1e6920l62ffaff864634552@mail.gmail.com> References: <5ab1dc970911180101p2b1e6920l62ffaff864634552@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: HI Ali, It would indeed be very helpful if I could obtain a copy of your poset ontology. Examples of cl-module and cl-import usage would be particularly helpful. Please let me know how I can obtain a copy. Thanks much, Cameron. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Ali Hashemi wrote: > Hi Cameron, > > I wrote up a relatively extensive ontology for partially ordered sets in > CLIF (or to be more specific, a semi-lattice of ontologies for the poset > conceptual domain). It made extensive use of the "cl-module" and "cl-import" > statements, but due to the unavailability of CL reasoners, I avoided > quantifying over named relations, even though it would have made expressing > non-conservative extensions more natural. The picture here( > http://tinypic.com/r/vgk8cz/6 ) shows the semi-lattice of theories for > this conceptual domain. > > As a side note, due to no accessible tools, I ended up translating the > ontologies into Prover9/Mace4 syntax to test consistency and play around > with automatic model generation. While it's not yet persistently online, I > can provide you with a copy of the poset ontology hierarchy (from partial > orders & comparability graphs all the way down to boolean lattices), if you > are interested. > > Moreover, a number of CLIF ontologies should be appearing at > http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca *relatively *soon. > > Ali > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > >> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop tools >> for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described using >> CLIF? >> >> Cameron. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >> >> > > > -- > (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andersen at ontologyworks.com Wed Nov 18 13:08:29 2009 From: andersen at ontologyworks.com (Bill Andersen) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:08:29 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> References: <6AF39B10-6DBA-4FB7-A56E-C1F6862387A0@berkeleybop.org> Message-ID: <75E0B32F-896A-4448-80D8-B9BF128ACAD3@ontologyworks.com> On Nov 17, 2009, at 17:36 , Chris Mungall wrote: > Hi Cameron > > I know there are some closed-source tools out there, but I'm not > aware of any general purpose open source toolkit. > > There is this: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/common-logic/ > > But it's empty, I'm hoping Bill Anderson and the Ontology Works folk > will put something there someday. Hey all... A while back, I was intending to put some code out there. Actually I do have some stuff, but it's not for plain-vanilla CLIF. It's a dialect similar to CLIF but with significant enough differences that it would not be worth my while (nor anyone else's for the near term) to put it out there. That said, nothing is preventing anyone from joining the project and putting their code up there. .bill From rschulz at sonic.net Wed Nov 18 14:06:58 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:06:58 -0800 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: <608FD489C33A42D981BE8D9959D8AAB0@owner1888863da> Message-ID: <200911181206.59191.rschulz@sonic.net> On Tuesday November 17 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > Hi Jay, > > Ah yes PSL... There was a discussion on the list some time ago about > PSL and CLIF > (http://philebus.tamu.edu/pipermail/cl/2007-June/001136.html). I'm > wondering if there are now any examples demonstrating the "whole text > / phrase / module / importation / exclusion melange" as outlined in > that thread. We (H&S and Conrad Bock from NIST) have produced a refactored version of the PSL ontology that eliminates duplication in favor of uses of (cl:imports ...) to build the larger subsets and the full theory from the smaller subset theories. We do make extensive use of (cl:text ...) hierarchies to allow selective retrieval of content from a single body of CLIF content. This uses an access mechanism in our software that is not part of the standard. It is based on a notion of "path names" through cl:text hierarchies. (I'm not actually sure this approach is consistent with the CLIF annex.) > Thanks though, > Cameron. Randall Schulz From cross at kojeware.com Wed Nov 18 14:11:51 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:11:51 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <200911181206.59191.rschulz@sonic.net> References: <608FD489C33A42D981BE8D9959D8AAB0@owner1888863da> <200911181206.59191.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: <-1803601487488137596@unknownmsgid> Hi Randall, Is this refactored version of PSL available for public consumption? Aside from CL tooling, it would also be useful to compile some patterns and best practices on how to construct models using CLIF. Thanks, Cameron. Sent from my iPhone On Nov 18, 2009, at 3:06 PM, Randall R Schulz wrote: > On Tuesday November 17 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: >> Hi Jay, >> >> Ah yes PSL... There was a discussion on the list some time ago about >> PSL and CLIF >> (http://philebus.tamu.edu/pipermail/cl/2007-June/001136.html). I'm >> wondering if there are now any examples demonstrating the "whole text >> / phrase / module / importation / exclusion melange" as outlined in >> that thread. > > We (H&S and Conrad Bock from NIST) have produced a refactored > version of > the PSL ontology that eliminates duplication in favor of uses of > (cl:imports ...) to build the larger subsets and the full theory from > the smaller subset theories. > > We do make extensive use of (cl:text ...) hierarchies to allow > selective > retrieval of content from a single body of CLIF content. This uses an > access mechanism in our software that is not part of the standard. It > is based on a notion of "path names" through cl:text hierarchies. (I'm > not actually sure this approach is consistent with the CLIF annex.) > > >> Thanks though, >> Cameron. > > > Randall Schulz > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl From rschulz at sonic.net Wed Nov 18 14:26:11 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:26:11 -0800 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <-1803601487488137596@unknownmsgid> References: <200911181206.59191.rschulz@sonic.net> <-1803601487488137596@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <200911181226.11414.rschulz@sonic.net> On Wednesday November 18 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > Hi Randall, > > Is this refactored version of PSL available for public consumption? > Aside from CL tooling, it would also be useful to compile some > patterns and best practices on how to construct models using CLIF. It was created internally along the way and I don't think it reflects the current state of the content on the NIST Web site [1]. In any event, it just amounted to replacing the replicated "core" axioms in the larger ontologies with (cl:imports http://.../core.clf) and so on for the larger subsets. [1] > Thanks, > Cameron. Randall Schulz From phayes at ihmc.us Wed Nov 18 17:15:45 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:15:45 -0600 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: <1EBC4208-C5C8-4B50-AC03-ED90A0CE5961@ihmc.us> Message-ID: <3244E74F-67B5-489B-8632-CF6D8D4847A5@ihmc.us> On Nov 17, 2009, at 12:48 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > Great! Any chance of getting a preview so that I can test a parser > I'm developing? YOu can have it as soon as it exists in legal CL. Right now it is notes and diagrams. BTW, there is a chunk of CLIF visible at http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes/ikl/guide/guide.html#AppendixA Its listed as "IKL" but it is pretty much CLIF, apart from changing comment to cl-comment throughout. Pat > > Cameron. > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Pat Hayes wrote: > > On Nov 16, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > >> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to >> develop tools for Common Logic? > > Not by me, I'm afraid. > >> Also, are there any significant examples described using CLIF? > > I'm working on one right now, an ontology for quantities, units and > dimensions, which will be written in CLIF as the normative standard. > Hopefully something nontrivial will be available in a few months time. > > Pat > > >> >> Cameron. >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 > 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > > > > -- > Cameron Ross > Director of Technology > Kojeware Corporation > 705-929-1492 > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ali.hashemi at utoronto.ca Wed Nov 18 20:30:58 2009 From: ali.hashemi at utoronto.ca (Ali Hashemi) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:30:58 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: References: <5ab1dc970911180101p2b1e6920l62ffaff864634552@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5ab1dc970911181830pec6f6fcof745337457f1cdb7@mail.gmail.com> Hi Cameron, You can download the core hierarchy for partial orderings from here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/856524/Poset%20Core%20Hierarchy.rar Each module is in an rtf file. FYI, some of the comments might need some cleaning to work with your parser. Ali On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > HI Ali, > > It would indeed be very helpful if I could obtain a copy of your poset > ontology. Examples of cl-module and cl-import usage would be particularly > helpful. Please let me know how I can obtain a copy. > > Thanks much, > Cameron. > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Ali Hashemi wrote: > >> Hi Cameron, >> >> I wrote up a relatively extensive ontology for partially ordered sets in >> CLIF (or to be more specific, a semi-lattice of ontologies for the poset >> conceptual domain). It made extensive use of the "cl-module" and "cl-import" >> statements, but due to the unavailability of CL reasoners, I avoided >> quantifying over named relations, even though it would have made expressing >> non-conservative extensions more natural. The picture here( >> http://tinypic.com/r/vgk8cz/6 ) shows the semi-lattice of theories for >> this conceptual domain. >> >> As a side note, due to no accessible tools, I ended up translating the >> ontologies into Prover9/Mace4 syntax to test consistency and play around >> with automatic model generation. While it's not yet persistently online, I >> can provide you with a copy of the poset ontology hierarchy (from partial >> orders & comparability graphs all the way down to boolean lattices), if you >> are interested. >> >> Moreover, a number of CLIF ontologies should be appearing at >> http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca *relatively *soon. >> >> Ali >> >> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: >> >>> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop >>> tools for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described >>> using CLIF? >>> >>> Cameron. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CL mailing list >>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >> >> > > > -- > Cameron Ross > Director of Technology > Kojeware Corporation > 705-929-1492 > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phayes at ihmc.us Thu Nov 19 00:45:19 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:45:19 -0600 Subject: [CL] Clif white space scanning rules In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <670AFBC4-5215-45AD-83D2-0E5400FFC2A2@ihmc.us> On Nov 17, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > The lexical rules for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer > to the "white" lexical rule. This results in nondeterminism in the > "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" lexical rules. I recall that the > lexical rule for "white" was modified at some point to include > alternatives for temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the > comment alternatives that are causing the nondeterminism in the > quoted string rules. Is there any harm is revising the spec so that > "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" refer to "whitechar" instead of > "white"? This will remove the nondeterminism without having to jump > through hoops. Indeed. Thanks for noticing this, and your suggested emendation sounds exactly right, provided we say whitechar*, which is what I expect you meant, right? Pat > > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From cross at kojeware.com Thu Nov 19 08:38:31 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:38:31 -0500 Subject: [CL] Clif white space scanning rules In-Reply-To: <670AFBC4-5215-45AD-83D2-0E5400FFC2A2@ihmc.us> References: <670AFBC4-5215-45AD-83D2-0E5400FFC2A2@ihmc.us> Message-ID: Hi Pat, For clarity, I'm submitting a "proposed defect report" to the CL list. Not exactly sure what the process is for submitting potential defects beyond this. Someone please let me know if I'm required to perform additional steps. Thanks, Cameron. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 Qualifier: Error References in Document: Quoted string productions in Annex A, section A.2.2.5, page 27 Nature of defect: The productions for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer to the "white" production. This results in nondeterminism in the "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" productions. I recall that the production for "white" was modified at some point to include alternatives for temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the comment alternatives that are causing nondeterminism in the quoted string productions. I propose that the productions in section A.2.2.5 be revised to remove this nondeterminism which will simplify lexer/parser implementation. Solution proposed by the submitter: Change the productions in section A.2.2.5 to: quotedstring = stringquote, { whitechar | open | close | char | nonascii | namequote | innerstringquote | innerbackslash }, stringquote ; enclosedname = namequote, { whitechar | open | close | char | nonascii | stringquote | innernamequote }, namequote ; ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > > On Nov 17, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > > The lexical rules for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer to >> the "white" lexical rule. This results in nondeterminism in the >> "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" lexical rules. I recall that the lexical >> rule for "white" was modified at some point to include alternatives for >> temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the comment alternatives that are >> causing the nondeterminism in the quoted string rules. Is there any harm is >> revising the spec so that "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" refer to >> "whitechar" instead of "white"? This will remove the nondeterminism without >> having to jump through hoops. >> > > Indeed. Thanks for noticing this, and your suggested emendation sounds > exactly right, provided we say whitechar*, which is what I expect you meant, > right? > > Pat > > >> Cameron. >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Thu Nov 19 08:44:42 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:44:42 -0500 Subject: [CL] Potential missing character in CLIF grammar Message-ID: I notice that the '@' character is not included in the production for char in section A.2.2.3 of the standard. Is this deliberate or an omission? Cameron. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phayes at ihmc.us Thu Nov 19 09:17:44 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:17:44 -0600 Subject: [CL] Clif white space scanning rules In-Reply-To: References: <670AFBC4-5215-45AD-83D2-0E5400FFC2A2@ihmc.us> Message-ID: Oh, I see. Just for the record, can you give us a simple example showing the nondeterminism? You have done just the right thing concerning the report. The ISO process will pick this up at the next round. Pat On Nov 19, 2009, at 8:38 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > Hi Pat, > > For clarity, I'm submitting a "proposed defect report" to the CL > list. Not exactly sure what the process is for submitting potential > defects beyond this. Someone please let me know if I'm required to > perform additional steps. > > Thanks, > Cameron. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com > For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 > Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 > Qualifier: Error > References in Document: Quoted string productions in Annex A, > section A.2.2.5, page 27 > > Nature of defect: > The productions for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer > to the "white" production. This results in nondeterminism in the > "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" productions. I recall that the > production for "white" was modified at some point to include > alternatives for temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the > comment alternatives that are causing nondeterminism in the quoted > string productions. I propose that the productions in section A. > 2.2.5 be revised to remove this nondeterminism which will simplify > lexer/parser implementation. > > Solution proposed by the submitter: > Change the productions in section A.2.2.5 to: > quotedstring = stringquote, { whitechar | open | close | char | > nonascii | namequote | innerstringquote | innerbackslash }, > stringquote ; > enclosedname = namequote, { whitechar | open | close | char | > nonascii | stringquote | innernamequote }, namequote ; > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > > On Nov 17, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: > > The lexical rules for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer > to the "white" lexical rule. This results in nondeterminism in the > "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" lexical rules. I recall that the > lexical rule for "white" was modified at some point to include > alternatives for temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the > comment alternatives that are causing the nondeterminism in the > quoted string rules. Is there any harm is revising the spec so that > "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" refer to "whitechar" instead of > "white"? This will remove the nondeterminism without having to jump > through hoops. > > Indeed. Thanks for noticing this, and your suggested emendation > sounds exactly right, provided we say whitechar*, which is what I > expect you meant, right? > > Pat > > > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 > 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > > > -- > Cameron Ross > Director of Technology > Kojeware Corporation > 705-929-1492 > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phayes at ihmc.us Thu Nov 19 09:20:01 2009 From: phayes at ihmc.us (Pat Hayes) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 09:20:01 -0600 Subject: [CL] Potential missing character in CLIF grammar In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6EBD1637-E244-494C-B086-C7C141EEC5A8@ihmc.us> On Nov 19, 2009, at 8:44 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > I notice that the '@' character is not included in the production > for char in section A.2.2.3 of the standard. Is this deliberate or > an omission? It seems to be an omission, as the @ symbol is not used anywhere in the CLIF syntax. Moreover, we would wish to allow an email address to be an identifier, so this omission is potentially harmful. Well spotted. Pat > Cameron. > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes From cross at kojeware.com Thu Nov 19 09:30:12 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:30:12 -0500 Subject: [CL] ISO 24707 defect report: '@' character omitted from CLIF grammar Message-ID: Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 Qualifier: Omission References in Document: The production for char in section A.2.2.3, page 26 Nature of defect: The '@' character is not included in the production for char. Moreover, Annex A of the standard does not indicate how a lexer should treat the '@' character. Solution proposed by the submitter: Add the '@' character as an alternative for the char production in section A.2.2.3. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rschulz at sonic.net Thu Nov 19 09:36:11 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 07:36:11 -0800 Subject: [CL] ISO 24707 defect report: '@' character omitted from CLIF grammar In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200911190736.11962.rschulz@sonic.net> On Thursday November 19 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com > For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 > Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 > Qualifier: Omission > References in Document: The production for char in section A.2.2.3, > page 26 > > Nature of defect: > The '@' character is not included in the production for char. > Moreover, Annex A of the standard does not indicate how a lexer > should treat the '@' character. > > Solution proposed by the submitter: > Add the '@' character as an alternative for the char production in > section A.2.2.3. Check the archives. I reported this over a year ago. Start here for the thread: Randall Schulz From cross at kojeware.com Thu Nov 19 09:49:52 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:49:52 -0500 Subject: [CL] ISO 24707 defect report: '@' character omitted from CLIF grammar In-Reply-To: <200911190736.11962.rschulz@sonic.net> References: <200911190736.11962.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: It looks like the omission didn't make its way into the defect report so we're repeating a bit of history here. Is there something we can do to improve the defect reporting process? How do the defect reports I've just submitted to the list make their way into this document: http://common-logic.org/24707-defect-report.pdf? I'm currently going through Annex A in detail and suspect I'll be submitting a number of additional defect reports in the near future. I want to make sure that my efforts to improve the standard don't slip into oblivion. Cameron. On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Randall R Schulz wrote: > On Thursday November 19 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > > Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com > > For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 > > Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 > > Qualifier: Omission > > References in Document: The production for char in section A.2.2.3, > > page 26 > > > > Nature of defect: > > The '@' character is not included in the production for char. > > Moreover, Annex A of the standard does not indicate how a lexer > > should treat the '@' character. > > > > Solution proposed by the submitter: > > Add the '@' character as an alternative for the char production in > > section A.2.2.3. > > Check the archives. I reported this over a year ago. > > Start here for the thread: > > > > > Randall Schulz > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Fri Nov 20 08:44:42 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:44:42 -0500 Subject: [CL] CL tools and examples In-Reply-To: <5ab1dc970911181830pec6f6fcof745337457f1cdb7@mail.gmail.com> References: <5ab1dc970911180101p2b1e6920l62ffaff864634552@mail.gmail.com> <5ab1dc970911181830pec6f6fcof745337457f1cdb7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks Ali. I'll let you know how this goes. Cameron. On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Ali Hashemi wrote: > Hi Cameron, > > You can download the core hierarchy for partial orderings from here: > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/856524/Poset%20Core%20Hierarchy.rar > > Each module is in an rtf file. FYI, some of the comments might need some > cleaning to work with your parser. > > Ali > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > >> HI Ali, >> >> It would indeed be very helpful if I could obtain a copy of your poset >> ontology. Examples of cl-module and cl-import usage would be particularly >> helpful. Please let me know how I can obtain a copy. >> >> Thanks much, >> Cameron. >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Ali Hashemi wrote: >> >>> Hi Cameron, >>> >>> I wrote up a relatively extensive ontology for partially ordered sets in >>> CLIF (or to be more specific, a semi-lattice of ontologies for the poset >>> conceptual domain). It made extensive use of the "cl-module" and "cl-import" >>> statements, but due to the unavailability of CL reasoners, I avoided >>> quantifying over named relations, even though it would have made expressing >>> non-conservative extensions more natural. The picture here( >>> http://tinypic.com/r/vgk8cz/6 ) shows the semi-lattice of theories for >>> this conceptual domain. >>> >>> As a side note, due to no accessible tools, I ended up translating the >>> ontologies into Prover9/Mace4 syntax to test consistency and play around >>> with automatic model generation. While it's not yet persistently online, I >>> can provide you with a copy of the poset ontology hierarchy (from partial >>> orders & comparability graphs all the way down to boolean lattices), if you >>> are interested. >>> >>> Moreover, a number of CLIF ontologies should be appearing at >>> http://stl.mie.utoronto.ca *relatively *soon. >>> >>> Ali >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: >>> >>>> Just wondering if there has been any progress on projects to develop >>>> tools for Common Logic? Also, are there any significant examples described >>>> using CLIF? >>>> >>>> Cameron. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> CL mailing list >>>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >>>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CL mailing list >>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Cameron Ross >> Director of Technology >> Kojeware Corporation >> 705-929-1492 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >> >> > > > -- > (?`'?.?(`'?.?(?)?.?'?)?.?'??) .,., > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Mon Nov 23 08:04:40 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:04:40 -0500 Subject: [CL] Clif white space scanning rules In-Reply-To: References: <670AFBC4-5215-45AD-83D2-0E5400FFC2A2@ihmc.us> Message-ID: Sure, Any single line or multi-line comment produces the nondeterminism. For example, "// any single line comment", or "/* any multi-line comment */" (double quotes added to provide clarity for the reader). The problem is that the comment delimiters (i.e. // and /*...*/) are also included within the char production. The productions in A.2.2.5 have white and char as alternatives. Both of these alternatives can match a single line or multi-line comment. This nondeterminism goes away if we change "white" to "whitechar" in the A.2.2.5 productions without losing anything. That is you retain the ability to embed temporary comments within quoted strings. The comment delimiters would simply treated as chars in the productions for quoted strings. Cameron. On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > Oh, I see. Just for the record, can you give us a simple example showing > the nondeterminism? > > You have done just the right thing concerning the report. The ISO process > will pick this up at the next round. > > Pat > > On Nov 19, 2009, at 8:38 AM, Cameron Ross wrote: > > Hi Pat, > > For clarity, I'm submitting a "proposed defect report" to the CL list. Not > exactly sure what the process is for submitting potential defects beyond > this. Someone please let me know if I'm required to perform additional > steps. > > Thanks, > Cameron. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Submitter: Cameron Ross, cross at kojeware.com > For review by: JTC1/SC 32/WG2 > Defect report concerning: ISO 24707:2007 > Qualifier: Error > References in Document: Quoted string productions in Annex A, section > A.2.2.5, page 27 > > Nature of defect: > The productions for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer to the > "white" production. This results in nondeterminism in the "quotedstring" > and "enclosedname" productions. I recall that the production for "white" > was modified at some point to include alternatives for temporary comments > (see A.2.2.1). It is the comment alternatives that are causing > nondeterminism in the quoted string productions. I propose that the > productions in section A.2.2.5 be revised to remove this nondeterminism > which will simplify lexer/parser implementation. > > Solution proposed by the submitter: > Change the productions in section A.2.2.5 to: > quotedstring = stringquote, { whitechar | open | close | char | nonascii | > namequote | innerstringquote | innerbackslash }, stringquote ; > enclosedname = namequote, { whitechar | open | close | char | nonascii | > stringquote | innernamequote }, namequote ; > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Pat Hayes wrote: > >> >> On Nov 17, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Cameron Ross wrote: >> >> The lexical rules for quoted strings in CLIF (section A.2.2.5) refer to >>> the "white" lexical rule. This results in nondeterminism in the >>> "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" lexical rules. I recall that the lexical >>> rule for "white" was modified at some point to include alternatives for >>> temporary comments (see A.2.2.1). It is the comment alternatives that are >>> causing the nondeterminism in the quoted string rules. Is there any harm is >>> revising the spec so that "quotedstring" and "enclosedname" refer to >>> "whitechar" instead of "white"? This will remove the nondeterminism without >>> having to jump through hoops. >>> >> >> Indeed. Thanks for noticing this, and your suggested emendation sounds >> exactly right, provided we say whitechar*, which is what I expect you meant, >> right? >> >> Pat >> >> >>> Cameron. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> CL mailing list >>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >>> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 >> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office >> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax >> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile >> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CL mailing list >> CL at philebus.tamu.edu >> http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl >> > > > > -- > Cameron Ross > Director of Technology > Kojeware Corporation > 705-929-1492 > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 > 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office > Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax > FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile > phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cross at kojeware.com Mon Nov 23 13:23:46 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:23:46 -0500 Subject: [CL] CLIF terms and atoms Message-ID: I'm reviewing the CLIF spec in Annex A of the standard and I have a question relating to terms and atoms. The production for term in section A.2.3.3 defines "( open, operator, termseq, close )" as an alternative which can be directly factored into "( open, term, termseq, close )". The production for atom in section A.2.3.6 defines "( open, predicate, termseq, close )" as an alternative which can also be directly factored into "( open, term, termseq, close )". Is a fragment of CLIF text such as "(a b)" a term or an atom? Cameron. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rschulz at sonic.net Mon Nov 23 13:47:06 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:47:06 -0800 Subject: [CL] CLIF terms and atoms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200911231147.07039.rschulz@sonic.net> On Monday November 23 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > ... > Is a fragment of CLIF text such as "(a b)" a term or an atom? Absolutely. CLIFs grammar does not allow free-standing terms, so if "(a b)" is the totality of the input, then it is a formula, an atomic formula, that applies the predicate "a" to the individual constant "b." Furthermore, while complex terms (those that apply functions) may nest arbitrarily, the same is not true for atomic formulas (predicate application), which do not nest at all. Thus the ambiguity is resolved. However, if you "zoom in" on some CLIF and see the substring "(a b)" and cannot see the context in which it appears, you cannot say whether you're looking at an atomic (sub-) formula or a (sub-) term. By the way, this: "(a (a b))" is also legal CLIF, but "a" is used both as a unary predicate and as a unary function therein. > Cameron. Randall Schulz From cross at kojeware.com Mon Nov 23 14:30:51 2009 From: cross at kojeware.com (Cameron Ross) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:30:51 -0500 Subject: [CL] CLIF terms and atoms In-Reply-To: <200911231147.07039.rschulz@sonic.net> References: <200911231147.07039.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: Hi Randall, Thanks for clarifying. I take it that "free-standing" applies to the alternatives for the phrase production... atoms are "free-standing" through a direct mapping to the phrase production (i.e. atom->atomsent->sentence->phrase), whereas terms have no similar mapping. When you say that "atomic formulas (predicate application), which do not nest at all" are you saying that the predicate production in section A.2.3.6 cannot comprise nested terms? Cameron. On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Randall R Schulz wrote: > On Monday November 23 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > > ... > > Is a fragment of CLIF text such as "(a b)" a term or an atom? > > Absolutely. > > CLIFs grammar does not allow free-standing terms, so if "(a b)" is the > totality of the input, then it is a formula, an atomic formula, that > applies the predicate "a" to the individual constant "b." Furthermore, > while complex terms (those that apply functions) may nest arbitrarily, > the same is not true for atomic formulas (predicate application), which > do not nest at all. > > Thus the ambiguity is resolved. > > However, if you "zoom in" on some CLIF and see the substring "(a b)" and > cannot see the context in which it appears, you cannot say whether > you're looking at an atomic (sub-) formula or a (sub-) term. > > By the way, this: "(a (a b))" is also legal CLIF, but "a" is used both > as a unary predicate and as a unary function therein. > > > > Cameron. > > > Randall Schulz > _______________________________________________ > CL mailing list > CL at philebus.tamu.edu > http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/listinfo/cl > -- Cameron Ross Director of Technology Kojeware Corporation 705-929-1492 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rschulz at sonic.net Mon Nov 23 15:23:21 2009 From: rschulz at sonic.net (Randall R Schulz) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:23:21 -0800 Subject: [CL] CLIF terms and atoms In-Reply-To: References: <200911231147.07039.rschulz@sonic.net> Message-ID: <200911231323.21969.rschulz@sonic.net> On Monday November 23 2009, Cameron Ross wrote: > Hi Randall, > > Thanks for clarifying. I take it that "free-standing" applies to the > alternatives for the phrase production... atoms are "free-standing" > through a direct mapping to the phrase production (i.e. > atom->atomsent->sentence->phrase), whereas terms have no similar > mapping. When you say that "atomic formulas (predicate application), > which do not nest at all" are you saying that the predicate > production in section A.2.3.6 cannot comprise nested terms? First of all, it's confusing to use "term" as a generic name for those syntactic constructs that yield referrents to elements of the universe of discourse and those that yield truth values. I use "expression" for that all-encompassing concept. I use "formula" and "sub-formula" for things with truth values and "term" or "sub-term" for things that refer to entities in the universe of discourse. To the best of my understanding, this is consistent with the use of terminology in the CL specification. By "free-standing" I mean a production that can be derived from the start symbol without any non-terminals being consumed outside that production itself. E.g., to recognize a term of any sort, you must have, at a minimum, an atomic formula surrounding that term. On the other hand, an atomic formula all by itself is a valid CLIF input. The smallest valid CLIF input is an atomic formula and the smallest valid atomic formula is a atom applying a zero-argument predicate, which is essentially the same thing as a propositional (or sentential) variable. E.g., "(a)" You cannot apply a predicate to another predicate application. You _can_ apply a function to another function application. Taken together, these facts resolve the ambiguity of a any given occurrence of a construction such as "(a b)" based on what, if anything, surrounds it. Randall Schulz