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

[c.a.rowley at open.ac.uk]

Apologies if this is a far too naive idea/question (by being either trivial
or totally ridiculous).  And certainly not wishing to delay the progress on
the finalisation of M3(???)

It would be very sad if SCM3 turns out not to be extensible in its support
of the wide variety of possible formalisations of mathematical semantics.
Extensible, that is, without having to produce v4 or v3.1.

Is it not possible to make SCM's alignment with both OM-n and maybe other
non-OM formalisations 'dynamic'?  So that it can support not only new CDs
but new 'Om atoms' and other formalisations that may be needed by
'real-world mathematical applications' (if OM remains true to the
lambda-philosophy and theology(?) of its founders:-).

Or maybe this type of thinking gets censored by the W3C mail system?

Hopeful of Highgate



without
-----member-math-request at w3.org wrote: -----

To: David Carlisle <davidc at nag.co.uk>
From: Michael Kohlhase <m.kohlhase at jacobs-university.de>
Sent by: member-math-request at w3.org
Date: 24/03/2009 23:50
cc: "om3 at openmath.org" <om3 at openmath.org>, "member-math at w3.org"
<member-math at w3.org>
Subject: Re: [Om3] Pragmatics, timing, summary, and proposed resolutions



David Carlisle wrote:
>> There are two possible ways of changing the draft, one is to change the
>> pragmatic-to-strict translation (big ticket item), and another is to
>> possibly extend the definition of strict content MathML
>>
>
> ah with that clarification, I now understand what you mean, thanks.
>
>
>> (one line in the schema and a couple in the spec text).
>>
>
> Rather more than that I fear. But in anycase I don't think that we
> should assume that any changes that the OpenMath Soc.  decides to make
> to OpenMath will be automatically incorporated into MathML.
Of course not, that is for the Math WG to decide.
> The OM
> group would have to make any decision to change OpenMath at this stage
> in the knowledge that this might, or might not, lead to it slipping out
> of alignment with MathML again, depending on what the Math WG decide to
> do at that time.
Yes, that is the nature of the coordination game, but it is good that
you spell this out in public.
>  Of course there are many things that OM could decide to
> do, such as new symbols for handling conditions that would not have any
> direct impact on the MathML spec.
>
And I expressed my hope that this would be the majority of changes we
will see.

Michael
> 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.
> ________________________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> Om3 mailing list
> Om3 at openmath.org
> http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om3
>

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase,       Office: Research 1, Room 62
 Professor of Computer Science     Campus Ring 12,
 School of Engineering & Science   D-28759 Bremen, Germany
 Jacobs University Bremen*         tel/fax: +49 421 200-3140/-493140
 m.kohlhase at jacobs-university.de http://kwarc.info/kohlhase
 skype: m.kohlhase   * on Sabbatical in Auckland (NZ) until VII/2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt
charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302)