From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!manuel!sserve!usage!spectrum!hughc Wed Feb  5 11:57:05 EST 1992
Article 3488 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca comp.ai:2055 comp.ai.edu:230 comp.ai.philosophy:3488
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!manuel!sserve!usage!spectrum!hughc
>From: hughc@usage.csd.oz (Hugh Clapin)
Newsgroups: aus.ai,comp.ai,comp.ai.edu,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: The procedural/declarative representation debate
Message-ID: <1992Feb5.030936.1383@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>
Date: 5 Feb 92 03:09:36 GMT
Sender: hughc@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Hugh Clapin)
Reply-To: hughc@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Hugh Clapin)
Organization: none
Lines: 19
Nntp-Posting-Host: cerise.spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au

Does anyone remember the debate over whether knowledge ought to
be represented procedurally or declaratively? I'm looking for
a good review article (or summary in a text book I guess) which
sets out the major arguments of either side. I'm particularly
interested in any claims that there is some knowledge that
*has* to be represented one way, and *can't* be represented the
other.

Has there been a consensus resolution to the dispute (perhaps 
along the lines that you represent knowledge in whatever
ways lead to the most efficient use of that knowledge)?

Any info appreciated.

hugh clapin
school of philosophy
university of new south wales

.


