[Om3] Conditions

[David Carlisle]

> No, I DID mean 'interval'. The use of 'condition' specifies a set, and I
> have no problem with that. It's the assertion that this set is an interval
> that worries me, i.e. the fact we are using 'interval' rather than 'set'
> as the container.

Ah, I see. That is a reference to one example in appendix c of MathML2.
I think that was just in error. <interval> as specified in chapter 4 of
mathml2 and mathml3 takes two children specifying the end points.
I can't see any text that justifes any other form.

Sorry I misread the document and thought you were objecting to the
limits of the integral being specifed as an arbitrary (and possibly
nonsensical) domain (using <condition>) rather than using the <interval>
form.

David

________________________________________________________________________
The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is:
Wilkinson House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is
powered by MessageLabs. 
________________________________________________________________________