[Om3] Pragmatics, timing, summary, and proposed resolutions

[David Carlisle]

Michael,

   2. for the OMSoc; if it wants to make changes to OM Objects (e.g. for
      the DavKoh proposal), then these must approved on the CICM
      meeting, so that they can be incorporated into the MathML3
      specification of SCM3.

It's not at all clear to me that we could get any OM3 text decided by
July, but even if we could, I agree with Robert that that's too late for
MathML. The next draft is supposed to be last call, even if we decide to
fit in one more WD before last call, we need to do last call before
July. If we finish up chapter 4 now, checking all the rewrites to
strict, proof reading all the texts etc, then even if OM does decide to
allow OpenMath to have these "extended" ("strange"?) binding constructs,
then MathML's translation to strict shouldn't use them as we'd be too far
down the line to redo all the translations to strict (even if we wanted
to).


That's the main point of Robert's choices A and B in the mail on Monday.
We need to have a plan for MathML that does not require the mathml spec
to track future changes to OpenMath,

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. 
________________________________________________________________________