[Om] invisible times and invisible plus
Jan Willem Knopper
jknopper at win.tue.nl
Mon Aug 31 14:45:45 CEST 2009
Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Jan Willem,
> I think a mixed-fraction symbol would be very useful and meaning-ful.
> But invisibletimes and invisibleplus really are not semantic-ful-
> enough to my taste.
I agree that a mixed-fraction is where there is a semantic difference,
and the other uses are not really important.
A symbol a mixed-fraction would be good enough for my purpose.
> PS: in activemath we have internal symbols for mixed fractions, not
I can do something with my own internal symbol, but I wanted to check if
there was a common way to do this.
> PPS: check MathML3, I vaguely remember it has a mixed-fraction concept
> at the core... or at least it was discussed.
A fraction using invisibleplus is mentioned in presentation markup is
mentioned as an example of invisible operators (126.96.36.199. Invisible
Operators). But this is only about presentation.
I could not find it at some other place. But it might well be possible
that I missed it, or that it did not make it to the working draft (yet).
Thanks for the quick reply,
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://openmath.org/pipermail/om/attachments/20090831/7b84ded6/attachment.pgp
More information about the Om