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

[Professor James Davenport]

On Wed, March 25, 2009 12:27 am, c.a.rowley at open.ac.uk wrote:
> 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.
Indeed so .
> 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:-).
This I think is the issue. As I understand it, the first is possible, but
not the second, since the 'new OM atoms' would have to map into the
DTD/Schema/however W3C formalises these things.

Looked at another way, this is the rationale for CDs :-)

James Davenport
Visiting Full Professor, University of Waterloo
Otherwise:
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology and
Chairman, Powerful Computing WP, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor and Programme Chair, OpenMath 2009
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication