[HN Gopher] Argdown: A simple syntax for complex argumentation ___________________________________________________________________ Argdown: A simple syntax for complex argumentation Author : stareatgoats Score : 80 points Date : 2023-01-18 16:19 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (github.com) (TXT) w3m dump (github.com) | gkfasdfasdf wrote: | Am I the only one that thought this was a universal format for | describing CLI arguments? | turboponyy wrote: | I figured the same. | jszymborski wrote: | I certainly thought that. | layer8 wrote: | I've never seen "argumentation" used in that context. | johnmaguire wrote: | I've long wished I could "declare" my CLI arguments in a | Markdown-like syntax (e.g. using `[]` and `<>` to denote | optional vs. required arguments) and have some library figure | it all out for me. | Flimm wrote: | You're in for a treat: that library already exists and has | been ported to multiple programming languages: | | http://docopt.org | gkfasdfasdf wrote: | Wow thanks, that does look interesting! | lgas wrote: | https://docopt.org/ may be of interest. | AndrewDucker wrote: | PowerShell does exactly that for its scripts. | | And then uses those definitions for autocomplete, validation, | etc. | RustyRussell wrote: | No, I clicked through and got confused, came here for | enlightenment. Thanks! | a9h74j wrote: | I haven't gone beyond reading the page, but the intent matches my | intuition that we need tools for better following (and agreeing | upon?) good "geometries" for arguments. | 082349872349872 wrote: | When corporate email threads start getting lengthy, I like to | flow* them. Too often it's not even a question of premises and | conclusions, but rather I find technical threads get hung up on | quibbling minor issues, while failing to engage ("arguing past | each other") wrt fairly major points. | | * eg https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big- | Quest... | spockz wrote: | Same here. I call it "structured reasoning" in my mind. | | I have been eyeballing https://www.kialo.com/ but I'm very | hesitant to use it for company decisions. | rco8786 wrote: | This is dying for some sort of example on the front page. I | clicked around trying to figure out what it was, assuming it was | some sort of argument syntax for CLI tools. | gpuhacker wrote: | Same here, I read the Readme twice and was still puzzled what | this is for. | mulmen wrote: | Did you try clicking on examples/, docs, or on the online | sandbox? | civopsec wrote: | Can't say I find the examples motivating. Just tells me more | about the author's tastes and proclivities than the utility | of all this markup. | rco8786 wrote: | Yes, and I eventually figured it out. That's why I am saying | it would be nice if it were on the front page, so people | don't have to click around. | tunesmith wrote: | Interesting. I've been working on a side project that combines | argument mapping with actual syntax checking - meaning that if an | argument's conclusion is purported to be "proven" via the | sufficiency of its premises and sub premises, then a counterpoint | further down in the graph will notify the conclusion that its | truth value is now in doubt. I wonder if it could use argdown as | an input method. | djokkataja wrote: | That sounds interesting; the weakness of the examples provided | with Argdown is that they come to a conclusion, but they don't | indicate _why_ that conclusion was chosen over the other | option, and it 's not clear that the conclusions actually | address everything. | mistermann wrote: | Are you working on this out in the open? I'd be very interested | to see what it looks like and where you're planning to go with | it. | stareatgoats wrote: | I've been scouring the web for things like this for a while; open | source tools that can represent an argument process in a visual | manner reminiscent of a workflow. There is obviously kialo.com, | but it doesn't quite tick all the boxes IMO. Interest in this | kind of thing additionally seems to have died out a few years | back. Are we waiting for an AI solution perhaps? | | In the meantime Argdown perhaps is the closest thing available. | nepger21 wrote: | For anybody wondering, argumentation here is this: | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework I found | the idea quite interesting within my master's program during AI | class. My prof. research group was trying to use this to detect | fake news. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-01-18 23:00 UTC)