IRC log of rif-prd on 2009-04-28
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 17:01:12 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #rif-prd
- 17:01:12 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2009/04/28-rif-prd-irc
- 17:01:24 [csma]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 17:01:32 [csma]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:01:32 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/28-rif-prd-minutes.html csma
- 17:01:44 [csma]
- Regrets: Paul Vincent
- 17:01:46 [apaschke]
- apaschke has joined #rif-prd
- 17:03:55 [csma]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 17:03:55 [Zakim]
- SW_RIF(PRD)1:00PM has not yet started, csma
- 17:03:56 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see apaschke, RRSAgent, cke, Zakim, csma
- 17:04:07 [apaschke]
- "not" was not accepted
- 17:06:46 [csma]
- Not-a-fact
- 17:07:24 [cke]
- why not just "neg"?
- 17:07:52 [csma]
- not, neg, naf
- 17:08:07 [csma]
- those ones are not for consideration
- 17:09:09 [csma]
- inflationary negation
- 17:10:23 [apaschke]
- not_class, not_inf, not_naf
- 17:10:44 [csma]
- Notnow
- 17:12:59 [apaschke]
- maybe we should offer several different proposals and them simply do a straw poll in the next general RIF telecon
- 17:13:07 [csma]
- Not(Exists ?x P(?x))
- 17:13:29 [cke]
- another example: (not (customer.age > 20))
- 17:14:00 [cke]
- if the customer's age is 18, then this is true
- 17:14:23 [csma]
- Nsf
- 17:14:49 [apaschke]
- prdNot, bldNot, coreNot, ...
- 17:16:14 [csma]
- Naf = Negation as failure
- 17:16:23 [csma]
- Nsf = Not supported by facts
- 17:16:31 [cke]
- and "boolean_not"?
- 17:21:11 [cke]
- I prefer it not to be an acronym. I like something explicit like "negation"
- 17:21:15 [csma]
- Notsf
- 17:21:44 [cke]
- Can we avoid saying "fact"?
- 17:22:07 [cke]
- There can be only test, like (not (customer.age > 20))
- 17:22:43 [apaschke]
- I prefer Nsf over Notsf since NsF is like Neg, Naf
- 17:23:47 [apaschke]
- a variant could be "No matching facts" = Nmf
- 17:26:07 [cke]
- how about "notf"?
- 17:27:06 [cke]
- Another example (customer (age not > 20))
- 17:32:02 [cke]
- how about "binary_not"?
- 17:32:19 [apaschke]
- classical (Boolean) negation
- 17:32:44 [apaschke]
- is a two-valued true-false logic
- 17:33:09 [apaschke]
- three-valued logic with unknown truth value (Kleene negation)
- 17:33:18 [cke]
- And "pnot" for production rule not?
- 17:33:36 [cke]
- or maybe "prnot"?
- 17:36:24 [csma]
- INot
- 17:36:48 [csma]
- NotI
- 17:37:02 [csma]
- Not(I)
- 17:37:27 [csma]
- Inot
- 17:37:37 [csma]
- INeg
- 17:37:48 [cke]
- I find ineg better
- 17:38:05 [cke]
- how do we write it?
- 17:38:17 [cke]
- ineg, INeg or Ineg?
- 17:38:30 [csma]
- PROPOSED: INeg (for Inflationary, or immediate, negation)
- 17:38:42 [cke]
- +1
- 17:41:32 [apaschke]
- subsumption is already an advanced concept to optimize the execution flow
- 17:45:11 [cke]
- Subsumption is very advanced, we have to do extensive analysis for this
- 17:45:47 [csma]
- PROPOSED: drop subsumion from the conflict resolution strategy, and come back to the previous consensus (refraction+priority+recency), maybe with an implementation note.
- 18:20:25 [csma]
- RRSagent, make minutes
- 18:20:25 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/04/28-rif-prd-minutes.html csma
- 18:20:57 [csma]
- zakim, list attendees
- 18:20:57 [Zakim]
- sorry, csma, I don't know what conference this is
- 18:21:22 [csma]
- zakim, this is rifprd
- 18:21:22 [Zakim]
- sorry, csma, I do not see a conference named 'rifprd' in progress or scheduled at this time
- 18:24:27 [csma]
- csma has left #rif-prd