[CL] Misleading passage about XCL

[Harry Delugach]

I agree with most of the comments posted here. XCL is not being touted as some great or essential idea to CL, merely as an expedient in keeping attention on CL.

I'd like to point out that, since XML itself has no inherent semantics, it's convenient to have a representation that is guaranteed in all cases to conform to CL semantics. This is not the case generally for either KIF or CGs, whose semantics have been adjusted/debated/discussed over the years. Some people will still confuse KIF with CLIF, and CGs with CGIF. So XCL can serve a purpose beyond the merely pragmatic (in the plain English sense!).

Harry
 
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:18 PM, Pat Hayes wrote:

> I entirely agree with Eric. The merits or otherwise of XML are, basically, irrelevant. One might was well try to argue a case for replacing English with Esperanto. It ain't going to happen, and trying to make it happen only makes one look ridiculous.
> 
> Right now, virtually all of the semantic Web and linked data traffic is conducted in some variant of XML, and this is not going to change in the forseeable future.  Last time I looked that was several hundred million facts, growing exponentially. Technical W3C specifications are written using "better" notations, and engines are implemented which can parse these notations, and what they actually do in practice is convert them to the XML reference interchange notation and send that over the Internet. Railing against XML serves no purpose than to instantly categorise oneself as a propellor-head geek who is completely out of touch with the real world. 
> 
> I do not mean to defend the current state of XCL, which is a ghastly mess and should (IMO) never have been published. But if CL is going to be used by more than a few dozen people, it *must* be given a well-defined and usable XML syntax. 
> 
> Pat Hayes
> 
> 
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Eric Peterson wrote:
> 
>> Dr. Sowa;
>> 
>> Thanks for your tireless efforts with CL.
>> 
>> Regarding your question about XCL use, I've written and XCL subset to Prolog translator that I hope/expect to use when my team finds a sufficiently scalable logic programming environment for our semantic store.
>> 
>> I agree with all of your technical criticisms of XML.  But my customers and colleagues are very comfortable with W3C recommendations and XML in particular. So the presence of XCL in your effort has increased my confidence that CL's wheels are on the ground and capable of traction in my world.
>> 
>> I'm not weighing in on the wordsmithing here.  I would just prefer not seeing XCL support diminish in any way until there is a new web interchange lingua Franca to replace XML.
>> 
>> Sorry if I'm reading too much into this thread.
>> 
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> -Eric
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 11:28 PM, John F. Sowa <sowa at bestweb.net> wrote:
>> The following two passages should be deleted from the CL standard:
>> 
>> On p. 23 Annex A, Section A.1:
>> 
>>  "The Recommended Common Logic interchange notation is based on XML,
>>  a standard which was not available when KIF was originally designed."
>> 
>> On p. 54 Annex C , Section C.1:
>> 
>>  "XCL is an XML notation for Common Logic.  It is the intended
>>  interchange language for communication Common Logic across a network"
>> 
>> XML is a notation that is commonly used on the WWW, but it has no
>> special properties that make it better or worse than any other
>> notation for transmission across a network.  In fact, XML tends
>> to make notations more bloated and therefore significantly
>> *worse* for data transmission.
>> 
>> Furthermore, XCL is the *least* frequently used of the 3 annexes.
>> Does anyone know of anybody who is using it?
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> CL mailing list
>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu
>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cl
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> CL mailing list
>> CL at philebus.tamu.edu
>> http://philebus.tamu.edu/cgi-bin/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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cl

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://philebus.tamu.edu/pipermail/cl/attachments/20101019/cff1b642/attachment.html>