[Om3] OMS and OMV contents?

[Paul Libbrecht]

Le 14 juil. 07 à 22:21, David Carlisle a écrit :
>>  Also I am not sure that we should use semantics here at all, we
>> could also use <attribution>
> we could, but to be honest I don't yet see _any_ use of semantics  
> where
> we couldn't use attribution (or visa versa)

I think semantics is slightly better defined than attribution.

Attribution in OpenMath has always appeared ghost to me because when  
you attribute something you do not know whether the "attribution  
statement" is for just the occurrence or some global scope. I may be  
wrong but I thought I had seen such statements as type attribution  
which appeared to have a larger scope.

I believe that the semantics/annotation-x elements are much better  
defined as only about the current occurrence.

Could be I am wrong...
It would be wise to make sure that the attribution element spec  
defines this well.

paul
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2203 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://openmath.org/pipermail/om3/attachments/20070715/149736d7/attachment.bin