It’s been gently suggested to me that we should think about where this group is going wrt standardization. I have a few thoughts on the matter, but in the interests of not prejudging anything, I created two polls on the topic. … Continue reading
Poll 2: State of the leading standard
(Again using this post as a sort of straw poll. Please comment with your answer and feel free to add additional comments. Also see the previous post/poll) Regarding the existing standard you considered best in the previous question, how advanced do you believe … Continue reading
Poll 1: Leading Standard
(Since we don’t appear to have polling functionality, I’m using this post as a sort of straw poll. Please comment with your answer and feel free to add any further comments. Also see the next post/poll) Please indicate which of these … Continue reading
Areas of accomodation
One issue that we face is accomodating ancillary functionality: Whether to accomodate How much How The last item, in my view, suggests a cautious answer: In order to keep our scope small, perhaps we can proceed by merely surveying primary … Continue reading
State of argument representation
First, I’m very much aware that there’s more going on in software and formats than I can personally keep track of. So please, everybody, feel free to comment with corrections and updates. That said, as I see it, the situation … Continue reading
“Statements or statement-like objects”
Our mission statement refers to “statement-like objects”. In order to dispel any lingering mystery, I’ll talk about that in this post. I phrase it that way so that we don’t commit prematurely to a representation. A mission statement would be too … Continue reading
Welcome
Welcome to the Argument Representation Community Group. Argument Representation’s mission is to recommend a standardized representation for formal argument. The group does not neccessarily commit to creating a novel representation. For instance, after due consideration it could endorse an existing one … Continue reading
