[om] a couple of questions

Paul Libbrecht paul at ags.uni-sb.de
Tue Apr 17 15:34:16 CEST 2001

At 12:36 PM -0700 4/16/01, Andrew Solomon wrote:
>2.  I want to express the set A = {a, b, c}
>where a,b,c are not variables in the sense that they aren't considered
>to be members of any set other than A, and can't change their value
>or be evaluated, but simply are what they are. The only thing that's important
>to me about "a" is its name.
>In universal algebra one would talk about an algebra with no function
>symbols and carrier set {a,b,c}.
>How do we do it in OpenMath?
>Should I just make the elements OMVs or OMSTRs?

The way to do this in OMdoc is simply by defining a new symbol for 
such an "atomic" thing, i believe.
Doing so in general openmath is a bit more complicated... but I see 
no reason why OMV would not be good. I believe OMSTR to be a bit of 
an "escape" for "unparsable things", we tend to avoid them.

om at openmath.org  -  general discussion on OpenMath
Post public announcements to om-announce at openmath.org
Automatic list maintenance software at majordomo at openmath.org
Mail om-owner at openmath.org for assistance with any problems

More information about the Om mailing list