[Om] Content-dictionary notations draft

[W Naylor]

One other typo, presumably the second example should be:

<notation precedence="50">
  <mrow><mi>a</mi><mo>+</mo><mi>b</b></mrow>
  <OMA>
    <OMS cd="arith1" name="plus"/>
    <OMV name="n"/>
  </OMA>
</notation>

A couple of points which don't appear to be addressed on the web site but 
I did discuss at some length at MKM 2001 
(http://www.risc.uni-linz.ac.at/about/conferences/MKM2001/Proceedings/naylor.pdf) 
and MathML 2002 (http://www.mathmlconference.org/2002/presentations/naylor/)
are:
1/ How do we deal with parts of the notation which depend on parts of the 
prototype (the OpenMath) in a non trivial manner (i.e. need some 
calculation to determine what to put in the presentation). For
example the super-script in the partial derivative notation

   ?
  d
----- f(x)  in this example, we might expect ? = x + y
d  d
 x  y

My solution then was to use 'template functions' (specified in OpenMath), 
I still stick by this solution, though of course it is not normative.

2/ The second point is to do with nary functions, even-though these are 
considered I believe that their treatment is oversimplified. What happens,
for example, if there are parts of the presentation which have some 
implicit nature, but also some dependant nature, e.g. the 0 above and 
below the diagonal of a diagonal matrix, what about the below diagonal 
elements of a skew matrix, again my solution was using template functions 
(as indexing functions, and a combination of this and solution 1 would 
work for the second example). These solutions are described in the second 
paper, but again not normative.

cheers,

Bill

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Professor James Davenport wrote:

> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> > please find at:
> >     http://eds.activemath.org/?q=en/node/81
> > a first draft specifying the elements that can describe mathematical  
> > notations associated to each symbols.
> Thanks for this, Paul.
> I don't quite understand the factorial example: isn't there as ! m9ssing 
> from the presentation, somehow?
> > 
> > The idea is to provide space for a declarative encoding of the  
> > "default renderings" of each symbol-usage pattern which can be  
> > inserted into (enhanced) content-dictionaries. It should allow tools  
> > to graspe them and offer quality rendering even for symbols "just  
> > found in a CD file encountered on the sidewalk".
> As Paul knows, I personally believe that they belong ALONGSIDE the CD, 
> ratehr than IN them: see
> http://staff.bath.ac.uk/masjhd/Drafts/Utility.pdf
> but the debate is worth having.
> James
> _______________________________________________
> Om mailing list
> Om at openmath.org
> http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om
> 
> 
> 

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
-
-                  Dr. W.A. Naylor
-
-                  http://www.cs.bath.ac.uk/~wn
-
-                  work tel: +44 1225 386183
-
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*