Our method is simply to treat a query as its own illocutionary force and to place the knowledge of what to do in response to a question in the programs that use and process the FLBC messages.
Having presented these rudiments of our FLBC and the theory behind it, we shall now discuss our prototype implementation.
In order to illustrate this concept, we have developed a prototype FLBC system written in Prolog.
In our FLBC system concept, there are four main roles for inferencing related to messaging.
If an FLBC, such as FLBC-2, has been well designed, based on a solid theoretical foundation, then it ought to generalize.
Under the FLBC approach, and in FLBC-2, we only need four atomic representations (assert, direct, commit, and declare), which we combine via a grammar to obtain the necessary distinctions.
Similarly, FLBCs generally, and FLBC-2 in particular, offer exactly these virtues when compared to standard EDI formats.
We shall see that there are quite a few such qualifiers, but first let us see, fundamentally, why this has to be so and why an FLBC (and, in particular, FLBC-2) produces representational economy and facilitates inferencing.
2) The idea of an FLBC is a generalization of EDI and tagged-message
3) Any FLBC implementation ought to be theoretically motivated.
5) The architecture of an FLBC system may be thought of as a
such an FLBC system, four main roles were found for inferencing on