Advertisement

Logic Programming Tailored for Office Procedure Automation

  • Klaus D. Günther
Part of the Management and Information Systems book series (MIS)

Abstract

The design of the experimental logic programming language PLOP (predicative language for office procedure automation) and an associated application-oriented programming environment aims at a proper integration of office databases and office procedure programming in a distributed environment, without being principally confined to office applications.

Keywords

Logic Programming Predicate Logic Query Condition Office Procedure Alert Condition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    B. Baumgarten, F. Lorenz, and P. Ochsenschlager, Distsys—Ein System zur Übersetzung funktionaler Programme in kommunizierende parallele Prozesse, Internal Report Gmd/Ifv, 1982, 43 pages.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Baumgarten and P. OchsenschlÄGer, Checkpoint/Restart-Verfahren gegen Komponentenausfall und Leitungsfehler in verteilten Systemen, Arbeitspapiere der Gmd, No. 13, 1983, 26 pages.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Van Caneghan, Ed., Proc. First International Logic Programming Conference,Marseille, France, 1982; see also “Logic Programming Conferences” of subsequent years.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.-M. Chang and S.-K. Chang, Database alerting techniques for office activities management, TEEE Trans. Commun., Com-30(1), 74–81 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Clifford and D. S. Warren, Formal semantics for time in databases, ACM Tods, 8 (2), 214–254 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. F. Clocksin and C. S. Mellish, Programming in Prolog, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981.MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. F. CoDD, Extending the database relational model to capture more meaning, ACM Tods, 4 (4), 397–434 (1979).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. D. GÜNther, Basic concepts of Plop—A predicative programming language for office procedure automation, Arbeitspapiere der Gmd, No. 52, 1983, 37 pages.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K. D. GÜNther, Syntax der prädikatenlogischen Programmiersprache Plop, Arbeitspapiere der Gmd, No. 53, 1983, 71 pages; and more recent versions (English version in preparation).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. D. GÜNther, Database requirements of computer-aided office procedures, Arbeitspapiere der Gmd, No. 54, 1983, 6 pages.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. D. GÜNther, Plop-A predicative programming language for office procedure automation, Proceedings TEEE Workshop on Languages for Automation, TEEE Computer Society Press, New York, 1983, 94–101.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    W. Kent, Data and Reality, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. A. Kowalski, Predicate Logic as Programming Language, Information Processing 74, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1974, pp. 569–574.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R. A. Kowalski, Algorithm = logic + control, Commun. ACM, 22 (7), 424–436 (1979).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    R. A. Kowalski, Logic for Problem Solving, Elsevier North-Holland, New York, 1979.MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Materna and J. Pokorny, Applying simple theory of types to databases, Inf. Syst 6 (4), 283–300 (1981).MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. M. Zloof, Query by Example, in: Afips Conference Proceedings 1975 Ncc,431–437.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus D. Günther
    • 1
  1. 1.Gesellschaft für Mathematik und DatenverarbeitungInstitut für SystemtechnikDarmstadtFederal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations