We look at two different ways of interpreting logic in the dependent type system ¿P. The first is by a direct formulas-as-types interpretation à la Howard where the logical derivation rules are mapped to derivation rules in the type system. The second is by viewing ¿P as a Logical Framework, following Harper et al. (1987) and Harper et al. (1993). The type system is then used as the meta-language in which various logics can be coded. We give a (brief) overview of known (syntactical) results about ¿P. Then we discuss two issues in some more detail. The first is the completeness of the formulas-as-types embedding of minimal first-order predicate logic into ¿P. This is a remarkably complicated issue, a first proof of which appeared in Geuvers (1993), following ideas in Barendsen and Geuvers (1989) and Swaen (1989). The second issue is the minimality of ¿P as a logical framework. We will show that some of the rules are actually superfluous (even though they contribute nicely to the generality of the presentation of ¿P). At the same time we will attempt to provide a gentle introduction to ¿P and its various aspects and we will try to use little inside knowledge.