[Om] name of OMS

[Christoph LANGE]

Dear all,

  the discussion on what to call a symbol reminds me of another issue.  I've
never liked the element name CDDefinition.  Especially if we follow David's
reasoning that an OMS _is_ a symbol, whereas a symbol is _defined_ in a CD,
shouldn't the name of that element be something like SymbolDefinition?  After
all, it is a definition of a symbol, not a definition of a CD.  Well, it is
a definition _in_ a CD, but that is IMHO not worth being materialised in an
element name.  In the ontology (subdirectory owl) I have named that thing
SymbolDefinition.  The only argument against doing it in the Relax NG is, of
course, that it would break compatibility.

Best,

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Lange, DERI Galway/Jacobs Univ. Bremen, http://kwarc.info/clange
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://openmath.org/pipermail/om/attachments/20080801/b899bbdd/attachment.pgp