[sc34wg3] FYI: Draft Proposed ISO Standard for Common Logic

[Mason, James David (MXM)]

 I pulled this off the SUO list. It may be of interest to those =
interested in
the logic of knowledge representation and other ISO activities in this =
area.

Jim Mason

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
[mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of =
John F.
Sowa
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 3:25 PM
To: cg@cs.uah.edu; standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
Subject: Draft Proposed ISO Standard for Common Logic

A draft of the proposed Common Logic standard was presented at the ISO =
SC32
meeting in Berlin in April:

    http://philebus.tamu.edu/cl/docs/cl/32N1238-WD24707-CommonLogic.pdf

Harry Delugach, who is the official editor of the document, presented =
the
following slides about Common Logic at the Open Forum on Metadata, which =
was
collocated with the ISO meeting in Berlin:

    http://philebus.tamu.edu/cl/docs/cl/Berlin_OpenForum_Delugach.pdf

One point that is not mentioned in WD 24707 or in Harry's slides is that =
we
have started to call the default notation used in the document CLIF =
(Common
Logic Interchange Format).  CGIF (Conceptual Graph Interchange Format) =
will
be 100% compatible with CLIF, and the syntax of CGIF and its mapping to =
and
from CLIF will also be standardized in the document.  This document is =
still
in development, and many of the sections will be revised, often =
extensively,
in the next few months.
The model theory and the first-order syntax are firm, but there may be =
some
extensions.  A final (we hope) version will appear in April 2006, and a
close-to-final version should appear in 3Q05.

There is an old version of a draft CG standard on my web site, which =
will be
replaced by this new document.  However, I intend to combine much of the =
old
material and quite a bit of new material in a tutorial on CGs, which =
will
discuss how to map all (or at least most) of the current CG techniques =
to and
from the standard.

The tutorial will add some features to CGIF that go beyond the standard, =
such
as actors. Whether or not those features get into the standard is an =
issue
that will be discussed on CG list.  My intention is to define actors =
formally
as a notation for functional conceptual relations and to include them in =
the
standard with that definition.  Any features that go beyond purely =
functional
forms (e.g., side effects) will not be in the standard.

Following are a few excerpts from ISO WD 24707 on Common Logic.

John Sowa
_______________________________________________________________________

Introduction, page 7:

Common Logic is a logic framework intended for information exchange and
transmission. The framework allows for a variety of different syntactic
forms, called dialects, all expressible within a common XML-based syntax =
and
all sharing a single semantics.

Common Logic has some novel features, chief among them being a syntax =
which
is signature-free and permits 'higher-order' constructions such as
quantification over Common Logic classes or relations while preserving a
first-order model theory, and a semantics which allows theories to =
describe
intensional entities such as Common Logic classes or properties. It also
fixes the meanings of a few conventions in widespread use, such as =
numerals
to denote integers and quotation marks to denote character strings, and =
has
provision for the use of datatypes and for naming, importing and =
transmitting
content on the World Wide Web using XML.

Scope, p. 9

This standard specifies a family of languages designed for use in the
representation and interchange of knowledge among disparate computer =
systems.

The following features are essential to the design of this standard

   * The language has declarative semantics. It is possible to
     understand the meaning of expressions in the language without
     appeal to an interpreter for manipulating those expressions.

   * The language is logically comprehensive-at its most general,
     it provides for the expression of arbitrary logical sentences.

The following are within the scope of this standard:

    * interchange of knowledge among heterogeneous computer systems

    * representation of knowledge in ontologies and knowledge bases;

    * specification of expressions that are the input or output of
      inference engines.

The following are outside the scope of this standard:

    * the specification of proof theory or inference rules;

    * specification of translators between the notations of =
heterogeneous
      computer systems.

    * free logics

    * conditional logics

    * methods of providing relationships between symbols in the logical
      "universe" and individuals in the "real world".

This document describes Common Logic's syntax and semantics.

The standard defines an abstract syntax and an associated model- =
theoretic
semantics for a specific extension of first-order logic.
The intent is that the content of any system using first-order logic can =
be
represented in the standard. The purpose is to facilitate interchange of
first-order logic-based knowledge and information between systems.

Issues relating to computability using the standard (including =
efficiency,
optimization, etc.) are not addressed.