[Om3] Pragmatics, timing, summary, and proposed resolutions

Professor James Davenport jhd at cs.bath.ac.uk
Wed Mar 25 12:46:35 CET 2009


On Wed, March 25, 2009 12:27 am, c.a.rowley at open.ac.uk wrote:
> It would be very sad if SCM3 turns out not to be extensible in its support
> of the wide variety of possible formalisations of mathematical semantics.
> Extensible, that is, without having to produce v4 or v3.1.
Indeed so .
> Is it not possible to make SCM's alignment with both OM-n and maybe other
> non-OM formalisations 'dynamic'?  So that it can support not only new CDs
                                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> but new 'Om atoms' and other formalisations that may be needed by
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 'real-world mathematical applications' (if OM remains true to the
> lambda-philosophy and theology(?) of its founders:-).
This I think is the issue. As I understand it, the first is possible, but
not the second, since the 'new OM atoms' would have to map into the
DTD/Schema/however W3C formalises these things.

Looked at another way, this is the rationale for CDs :-)

James Davenport
Visiting Full Professor, University of Waterloo
Otherwise:
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology and
Chairman, Powerful Computing WP, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor and Programme Chair, OpenMath 2009
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication



More information about the Om3 mailing list