COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	logic.pro[f83,jmc]	Proposal for logic in AI mailing list
C00005 ENDMK
C⊗;
logic.pro[f83,jmc]	Proposal for logic in AI mailing list

	Here is the message to which DAM has already referred.

	I find the phil-sci mailing list somewhat frustrating
because the discussants have too little in common and therefore
spend too much energy arguing.  Therefore, I think it might be
worthwhile to have a much narrower list.  It even might be
worthwhile to have an edited discussion.  It would be much
more tolerant than a journal, but not every contribution would
be accepted by the editor who might use referees if he found
it necessary.

	The subject matter would be logic in AI but would not
include Prolog programming, because there is already a discussion
list for that.  Its center would be formalization of common
sense facts including naive physics and actions to achieve
goals.  It would also include problem solving programs using
logic or logicoid (e.g. STRIPS-like) formalisms.  Reason
maintenance would be included also.  General considerations,
such as what kinds of formalization of reality are appropriate,
would be included, but the debate about whether reality is consistent
would be left for
phil-sci.  When technical terms from logic, e.g. structure,
interpretation and model, are used, participants would be
expected to adhere to the usage standard in logic.  For example,
a model of a collection of sentences is an interpretation in
which the sentences are true.

	Do you have an interest in such a discussion?  What topics
would you like to see included and excluded?
Should there be editing, and, if so, how should it be done?