[Attempto] (How?) Can attempto describe these concepts?

[Joshua TAYLOR]

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Norbert E. Fuchs <fuchs at ifi.uzh.ch> wrote:
>
> On 26 Mar 2012, at 22:24 , Joshua TAYLOR wrote:
>
>> As an aside, I was very pleased when ACE introduced
>> obligation/requirement.  I'm glad to see someone else using it, too.
>
> Joshua
>
> To describe clinical practice guidelines we added to "can" and "must" – introduced for other purposes – also "may" and "should" that, however, cannot be mapped to FOL.

Yes, it's true that they don't map to FOL, but I'd been doing my own
translating from DRS to some modal and deontic [1] and doxastic [2]
logics.  With the obligation/permissibility constructions in ACE,
along with nested propositions, ACE was a great choice as a natural
language interface for such logics.  It's *very* nice to be able to
write

"Mary knows that John believes that he may not steal."

and get something like (where K, B, and O are modal operators for
Knows, Believes, and Obligation, respectively)

K(Mary,B(John,O(~steals(John)))).

//JT

[1] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-deontic/
[2] http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-epistemic/

-- 
Joshua Taylor, http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~tayloj/