[om] MathML draft Notes available for review

Paul Libbrecht paul at activemath.org
Sun Aug 3 23:36:12 CEST 2003

Just for your information, Roger Costello of Mitre in his 
http://www.xfront.com/ website has made available an elementary schema 
for units. I have to say I find it definitely elementary even though 
most of his website is intended for OWL, the new-born descendent of 
DAML+OIL under W3C direction.

This raises a general question on how OWL and semantic math markup could 
actually interact. I think it would make a lot of sense if one could be 
able to express the whole CDs as part of OWL.

If my understanding is far enough, an OWL ontology should even be able 
to state such things as the very many parallel between MathML content 
and OpenMath.

For this someone really has to go RDF. Who has started ?


Professor James Davenport wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Bill Naylor wrote:
>>I have just read the Note "Units in MathML", I must say that there is a
>>lot more to the area than I had appreciated!
>>Stan, is it envisaged that these notes will become a part of the MathML
>>standard, or will they be part of a sort of MathML add-on, if the former,
>>then I guess that the MathML compliance core CD group should be extended
>>to cover units, if the later, it would still be good to have the OpenMath
>>units conform to the MathML ones. So it seems that the (rather naive) way
>>in which they are treated in units_imperial1 and units_imperial2 should be
>>altered to allow arguments, similar to the way in which for example
>>'contexts' are added to the MathML definitionURLs. This might also be a
>>way of deaing with multiplication factors.
> Conversely, I think it would be better if MathML at least allowed the 
> OpenMath base since this automatically (by FMP) includes all conversion 
> factors etc. However, there is a problem with presentation, and it might 
> be nice to formalise a mechanism for associating presentation  with 
> OpenMath symbols.
>>I think it is important to make units precise in OpenMath, since I have
>>heard the example of the Mars lander fiasco used quite a few times as a
>>reason for OpenMath. If units are not made precise in OpenMath, then this
>>sort of destroys that reason!
> I'm not sure I follow this. If OpenMath had been used, then the fiasco 
> could not have happened, since the OpenMath would specify the precise unit 
> correctly.
> James
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