[Om] Adding DLMF links to CDs [Re: How to translate csymbol/@definitionURL]

Paul Libbrecht paul at activemath.org
Wed Aug 25 08:04:53 CEST 2010

I encountered another usage recently... probably not *exactly*  
definition oriented: search canonicalization rules.
Examples of such are provided in Abou Youssef and Moody Altamimi's  
paper at extrememarkup for content-MathML but almost each rule could  
be considered an FMP.

What's interesting there is that really not all FMPs qualify as  
canonicalization rules (e.g. the associativity can, but probably only  
the one which "flattens"), that it goes in one sense and not the other  
(applying a definition such as the binomial coefficient's factorial  
expression certainly shouldn't go backwards for a normal search  
comparison, coming from 1 to sin^2 x + cos^2 x would be horribly  

I am not sure what is the criterion, except length shortening, but  
FMPs clearly are concerned, it's... just another set of FMPs.
More important, I believe, is that we give IDs to FMPs!


Le 20-juil.-10 à 00:29, Professor James Davenport a écrit :

>> Whether DLMF should provide an explicit URL indicating
>> "sine itself", or it's definition ... or whether we
>> should even think of ourselves as defining sine...
>> is something this discussion can help answer.
> This is close to the old DeFMP discussion (why am I not surprised), To
> summarise, some FMPs ARE definitions in the Principia Mathematica  
> sense
> that the definiendum can be replaced by the definiens. So 4.14.1 can  
> be
> read as a definition of sin, but 4.2.2 (by itself) cannot be a read  
> as a
> definition of log. The DeFMP debate was about stating this  
> precisely, i.e.
> this FMP is a definition, and it is legal to replace the definiendum  
> by
> the definiens. A use-case I had was an OM->Pascal translater, which  
> would
> replace cot by cos/sin [Pascal did not support cot etc.].
> As with OpenMath, it would be nice if the DLMF made it clear in a
> mahcine-parsable way (that's my, very small in the case of DLMF,  
> objection
> to the current system in both DLMF and OpenMath) which
> equations/properties are definitions in this sense.

More information about the Om mailing list