[Om] Adding DLMF links to CDs [Re: How to translate csymbol/@definitionURL]
Professor James Davenport
jhd at cs.bath.ac.uk
Sun Jul 18 12:15:02 CEST 2010
On Sun, July 18, 2010 12:13 am, Paul Libbrecht
begin_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting wrote:
> Le 17-juil.-10 à 23:08, David Carlisle a écrit :
> Isn't it pretty obvious that treating in OpenMath things outside
> OpenMath is problematic?
It may be obvious to you, it took me some time to come to the same
conclusion, but yes, I agree.
> Don't we need some "functors" down here that would "create an OpenMath
> something" based on some external description? Here's my 2p, using a
> functor external1#dlmf-description which would be interpreted as "a
> symbol defined in the text pointed at the named URL with the classical
> rigor of DLMF".
> <OMA><OMS cd="relation1" name="eq"/>
> <OMS cd="transc1" name="sin"/>
> <OMS cd="external1" name="dlmf-description"/>
In terms of the post I have just made replying to Burce, this would be
(correctly in my view) privileging (OED sense 2: The action of according
high status, validity, or importance to a concept, viewpoint, etc., in
comparison to others) 4.14.E1 and saying that the author of THIS file
believes that this DLMF equation defines something useful. I'd be happier
if these files were therefore written by/in cooperation with DLMF.
> I would tend to feel this as being cleaner.
> And I have no preference between relation1#eq and owl#sameAs. I think
> the more interesting question is what would be the equivalence of
> subclass statements.
Lecturer on XX10190, CM30070, CM30078/50123, CM50209
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor and Programme Chair, OpenMath 2009
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication
Council of the British Computer Society
Federal Council, International Foundation for Computational Logic
More information about the Om