[pandorabots-general] Newbie Problem

mehri foreverlinux at yahoo.com
Thu May 18 19:27:44 PDT 2006 

> I've also cc'd a few of the other creators of the
> other
> Interpreters on this email.  I'm interested in their
> opinions on
> this topic and what they think about how best to
> proceed.

I am behind this 100% and will be migrating RebeccAIML
to this xAIML.  I've been waiting for something of
this caliber for quite some time now.

With interpreters becomming more dynamic with plugin's
they shouldn't have to wait for approved tags. 
Instead they should implement what they want and have
a way to embed in the AIML a message to the other
interpreters, "Hey this is a different tag you might
not want to try and handle but if you do this is the
test cases you should pass to be compliant".

I feel that xAIML is the way to do this.  Already
interpreters have tags that are different from one
another and xAIML is a good way to let the bot brains
written for one work properly in another.




--- Brian Hoecht <brian_hoecht at msn.com> wrote:

> Noel,
> 
> That is a great response, very well thought out and
> quite
> thought-provoking.
> 
> I would again like to extend the offer to have you
> join the panel
> (see email floating around this list right now). 
> You have much
> to offer and the panel will be the poorer without
> you.
> 
> I've also cc'd a few of the other creators of the
> other
> Interpreters on this email.  I'm interested in their
> opinions on
> this topic and what they think about how best to
> proceed.
> 
> I do know that I am way over my head
> technologically... but that
> is not what I do... and why we are assembling a
> forum.
> Facilitating constructive discussion, collaboration
> and
> advancement of applied technology... now that I
> know.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
>
pandorabots-general-bounces+brian_hoecht=msn.com at list.pandorabots
> com
>
[mailto:pandorabots-general-bounces+brian_hoecht=msn.com at list.pan
> dorabots.com] On Behalf Of Noel Bush
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 9:32 AM
> To: pandorabots-general at list.pandorabots.com;
> xaiml at aitools.org
> Subject: Re: [pandorabots-general] Newbie Problem
> 
> It is not accurate to say that xAIML is a competitor
> to AIML.  In
> fact, 
> it's quite the opposite: xAIML implicitly asserts
> that there is
> *no 
> point* in "competing" with AIML -- if you are going
> to use a 
> pattern-matching oriented, stimulus-response sort of
> approach,
> then it 
> is much wiser to use AIML as a basis than to go off
> and try to
> reinvent 
> the wheel for the hundredth time.
> 
> Remember that xAIML is *not* an alternative to AIML
> -- xAIML is
> not 
> "another language" or "another standard".  This is
> true of xAIML
> to AIML 
> far much moreso than it is true of XHTML to HTML,
> for instance.
> 
> xAIML is, in fact, a wholehearted embrace of the
> "embrace and
> extend" 
> attitude.  xAIML just offers a way for people to
> describe and
> share 
> their embracings and extensions in a slightly more
> formal and
> useful 
> way.  At present, if some AIML interpreter includes
> an additional
> 
> feature, or does not implement a core AIML element,
> or implements
> an 
> AIML element differently from other interpreters,
> you just have
> to hope 
> that the documentation tells you so.  But in this
> case the notion
> of 
> "what AIML is" gets a little fuzzy, since, for
> instance, "what
> AIML is 
> to Pandorabots" may be different from "what AIML is
> to
> RebeccaAIML".
> 
> xAIML is a way for each interpreter to specify
> precisely how it
> matches 
> up with the base AIML functionality set.  The idea
> is that you
> can tell 
> "at a glance" whether a given interpreter has the
> functionality
> you're 
> looking for, and whether it will be able to use your
> (x)AIML set,
> and if 
> not, why.
> 
> At the same time, developers of "xAIML interpreters"
> can feel
> freer in 
> implementing extended functionality sets, or even
> altering some
> basic 
> AIML functionality, without a fear of falling out of
> the "circle
> of 
> trust" that a standard like AIML provides.  That
> circle of trust
> is 
> extremely useful, but it should not be a hindrance. 
> So xAIML
> provides a 
> suggested path for developers to follow in pursuing
> innovation
> while 
> retaining "measurable compatibility".
> 
> Brian's message brings up an important category of
> extensions to
> or 
> variations on AIML.  There are many "macro
> extensions" that
> people would 
> like to use in AIML, that can be implemented purely
> as
> transformations 
> from some alternate markup to AIML, via XSLT.  For
> instance, 
> "implementing" a <sr2/> element would be as simple
> as:
> 
> <xsl:template match="sr2">
>    <xsl:element name="srai">
>      <xsl:element name="star">
>        <xsl:attribute name="index">2</xsl:attribute>
>      </xsl:element>
>    </xsl:element>
> </xsl:template>
> 
> Now, if you have an interpreter that will recognize
> an XSL
> stylesheet 
> directive at the top of your document, and will
> apply the
> designated 
> stylesheet to the document before loading it, you
> have the means
> for 
> creating your own "dialect" that can vary
> considerably from
> "orthodox" AIML.
> 
> But now that you've got your own dialect, what to do
> with it?
> You still 
> want to be able to validate it, like you can
> validate AIML.
> There are 
> so many pieces of software out there -- free and
> commercial --
> that 
> allow you to validate AIML against a schema...even
> while you are
> typing 
> it, so you never need worry about submitting invalid
> AIML to your
> 
> interpreter.  But when you've written your own
> dialect, you also
> want 
> this same ability.  So you could just write your own
> schema --
> copy the 
> existing AIML schema and make your changes, for
> instance.  (Or
> write 
> your own schema.)  But then you'd be firmly "out of
> the circle",
> because 
> your dialect would no longer be "true AIML".  What
> to do?
> 
> The answer (I think) is xAIML, because it provides a
> structured
> means 
> for expressing the relationship of your derived
> dialect to its
> parent, 
> and offers a kind of "schema diff" functionality
> that should make
> it 
> easier to customize a schema for your own needs.  If
> you have an 
> xAIML-Spec for your dialect, then when you feed it
> to an xAIML 
> interpreter, that interpreter will know how to
> handle it.
> 
> And I think that the specific matter of "macro
> extensions" -- all
> those 
> extensions that can be handled with XSLT -- suggests
> that there
> should 
> be a certain level of xAIML interpreter which
> consists of nothing
> more 
> than the ability to apply a designated stylesheet to
> an input
> document. 
>   It would make a lot of sense to have a designation
> of
> "pure-transform" 
> or something like that as an available attribute on
> an xAIML spec
> element.
> 
> Noel
> 
> Dr. Rich Wallace wrote:
> > Brian, the simple answer to your question is that
> there does
> exist a body,
> > the AIML Architecture Committee, to debate,
> propose and adopt
> changes and
> > additions to the AIML spec.   For various reasons,
> that
> committee has been
> > dormant since 2002, and the 1.0.1 spec has
> remained frozen in
> place.  One
> > reason has been that the guy we relied on to write
> the spec
> (who is not a
> > computer scientist, but a "musician") has decided
> to compete
> with us
> > rather than cooperate, and has now announced his
> own confusing
> attempt to
> > create an "XAIML" standard right here on this
> mailing list and
> elsewhere. 
> > I personally don't see any standards efforts
> moving forward
> until someone
> > starts making more money from AIML applications. 
> So far the
> various
> > projects have adopted an "embrace and extend"
> approach, which
> has been
> > fertile ground for innovation.
> > 
> > One way to handle a simple macro extension like
> yours is at the
> authoring
> > level.  You can have the botmaster write <sr2/>
> but internally
> expand that
> > expression into <srai><star index="2"/></srai> in
> the AIML
> file.  That way
> > you get the best of both worlds.  "AIML Authoring
> Tools" has
> been a
> > subject of ongoing discussion for some time.
> > 
> > Rich
> > 
> >> Below is a category out of the Alice AAA
> Reducer.aiml file.
> >>
> >> <category>
> >> 	<pattern>_ HOWEVER *</pattern>
> >> 	<template>
> >> 		<srai><star/></srai>
> >> 		<srai><star index="2"/></srai>
> >> 	</template>
> >> </category>
> >>
> >> My question is this...
> >>
> >> If.....  <srai><star/></srai> = <sr/>
> >> Then...  <srai><star index="2"/></srai> =
> <sr2/>???
> >>
> >> Then this would be oh so much briefer if stated
> as:
> >>
> >> <category>
> >> 	<pattern>_ HOWEVER *</pattern>
> >> 	<template>
> >> 		<sr/>
> >> 		<sr2/>
> >> 	</template>
> >> </category>
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> _______________________________________________
> This is the pandorabots-general mailing list
> To Post, reply to
> pandorabots-general at list.pandorabots.com
> Unsubscribe and change preferences at
>
http://list.pandorabots.com/mailman/listinfo/pandorabots-general
> Learn netiquette at
> http://www.dtcc.edu/cs/rfc1855.html
> Learn to read at http://www.literacy.org/
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

More information about the pandorabots-general mailing list