Re: Comments on Pat's comments

From: pat hayes (
Date: 04/04/03

  • Next message: Harry Chen: "[Ann] A Temporal Reasoner in Prolog"
    >[[ I'm sending this just to  If that means someone
    >obvious is missing, let me know. ]]
    >Comments on Pat's comments:
    >More specific Hayes comments:
    >    >4.  There is a treatment of temporal aggregates.  Comments solicited.
    >    On the other hand, this seems too complicated. Maybe Im not seeing
    >    the reasons for the complexity, but using set theory seems like
    >    overkill right at the start. BTW, the 'clocks and calendars' section
    >    4 of my old time-survey memo has a treatment of some of these issues.
    >Where might that old memo be?
    In two parts:
    >    BTW, a general point: some of the complexity of parts of this can be
    >    eliminated by using CL rather than a conventional FO syntax.
    >Or by using a typed lambda-calculus.
    Types REDUCE complexity? I'll believe it when I see it.
    IHMC					(850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973   home
    40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
    Pensacola              			(850)202 4440   fax
    FL 32501           				(850)291 0667    cell	   for spam

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/04/03 EST