[Om3] trouble with container markup example

[Professor James Davenport]

On Thu, February 12, 2009 9:48 am, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Le 12-févr.-09 à 10:27, Professor James Davenport a écrit :
>> On Thu, February 12, 2009 9:21 am, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
>>> I think that the fact that Robert and myself didn't find it proves
>>> that a symbol having the semantic of
>>> set_of_expression_results_suchthat is wished.
>> But what precisely would the seminatics be to avoid Russell's
>> paradox. I
>> think you need to start with a ground set, AS IN map. Maybe the name
>> needs
>> improvement, but I am unclear whetehr you are suggesting different
>> semantics, and if so, which.
>
> I tried to write the description and reached exactly that of map!
>
> The most readable version would be a symbol as above to be a binder
> with a domain of definition.
> I don't see this possible in the current spec so map is the only
> choice. Am I wrong?
I think not. So map IS the right object, but with an unhelpful name.
>>> Since we have a "defining FMP" anyone can do so anytime...
>>> But consider here my suggestion (once we find a right name!) for
>>> inclusion into set1.
>> Fair comment. Indeed, if the DefMP proposal ever gets formalised
>> along the
>> line of <FMP type="defining">, we could even consider <FMP
>> type="alias">
>> as a simpled form for this case.
>
> This bumps into the desire for a "generalisation" operator as well.
True.

James Davenport
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology
Formerly Undergraduate Director of Studies, CS Dept
Lecturer on CM30070, 30078, 50209, 50123, 50199
Chairman, Powerful Computing WP, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication