Programs that engage in commercial transactions assume obligations on behalf of their owners in exchange for obligations assumed by other entities. It may be part of the specifications of an Elephant 2000 programs that these obligations are exchanged as intended, and this too can be expressed by a logical sentence.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Elephant programs that interact non-trivially with the outside world can have both input-output specifications, relating the programs inputs and outputs, and accomplishment specifications concerning what the program accomplishes in the world. These concepts are respectively generalizations of the philosophers' illocutionary and perlocutionary speech acts.claim0.812
  Fifth abstract claim.
• Elephant programs themselves can be represented as sentences of logic. Their extensional properties follow from this representation without an intervening theory of programming or anything like Hoare axioms.claim0.797
  Fourth abstract claim.
• Austin points out that uttering a promise creates an obligation in a public sense. This will be important also for computer programs, since a promise by the program may create an obligation, perhaps legal, on the part of the organization operating the program.claim0.795
  Importation of Austin's idea to programs.
• Elephant 2000 programs can perform some kinds of speech acts as genuinely as humans, including genuine promises.claim0.787
  McCarthy's position against Searle: computers can genuinely promise without requiring Searle's conditions (e.g., belief that fulfillment benefits recipient).
• For some purposes, it will be convenient to settle for specifications in terms of fulfilling internal commitments, and sometimes the public character of promises will have to be taken into account in the specifications.claim0.787
  Trade-off between internal and public obligations.
• We also propose to handle external obligations in an abstract way.claim0.777
  Proposal for type 1/type 2 obligations.
• The Elephant programmer in verifying his program need not show that the promise will be fulfilled because it was made. It is enough that he show it will be fulfilled.claim0.772
  Rejection of one of Dorschel's conditions for happy performance.
• What type 1 and type 2 obligations are, e.g. the legal requirements they impose, how they are to be treated when they conflict with other considerations, and the consequences of their non-fulfillment, is subject to institutional definition.claim0.771
  Claim that obligation types are institution-dependent.