[Trac] [OpenMath] #46: CD nums1

[OpenMath]

#46: CD nums1
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
     Reporter:  jauecker      |          Owner:  kohlhase  
         Type:  proposal      |         Status:  new       
     Priority:  major         |      Milestone:  CD3 Draft1
    Component:  OM3 Standard  |        Version:            
   Resolution:                |       Keywords:            
Include_gantt:  0             |   Dependencies:            
   Due_assign:  YYYY/MM/DD    |      Due_close:  YYYY/MM/DD
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
Old description:

> '''Chris:'''
>

> Are only integers ever 'based'?
>

> ---------------
>
> When I read this: 'the constructor function for integers' I
> immediately thought we were constructing the set of integers but it
> turned out to be only a far minor construction project, so should it
> not say: 'the constructor function for an integer' ?
>
> ---------------
>
> Is this correct?: <exponentiale/> to grab the Francophone
> audience:-)?  It just looks so much like a typo!
>
> <nlogbase/> would be more meaningful.
>
> <pi/> would be better as <ratiopi/>, to distinguish it from other uses of
> \pi.
>
> Please likewise keep the euler on gamma as there are other things called
> gamma.
> Why does this get a series expansion but \pi does not?
>
> (No, I don't know what to call 'i' either.)
>
> And what is NaN doing in numbers:-)?  More pertinently, surely it is
> not a K-12 concept?

New description:

 '''Chris:'''


 Are only integers ever 'based'?


 ---------------

 When I read this: 'the constructor function for integers' I
 immediately thought we were constructing the set of integers but it
 turned out to be only a far minor construction project, so should it
 not say: 'the constructor function for an integer' ?

 ---------------

 Is this correct?: <exponentiale/> to grab the Francophone
 audience:-)?  It just looks so much like a typo!

 <nlogbase/> would be more meaningful.

 <pi/> would be better as <ratiopi/>, to distinguish it from other uses of
 \pi.

 Please likewise keep the euler on gamma as there are other things called
 gamma.
 Why does this get a series expansion but \pi does not?

 (No, I don't know what to call 'i' either.)

 And what is NaN doing in numbers:-)?  More pertinently, surely it is
 not a K-12 concept?


 '''Michael:'''


 >Is this correct?: <exponentiale/> to grab the Francophone
 >audience:-)?  It just looks so much like a typo!

 yes, it is

 ><nlogbase/> would be more meaningful.
 >
 ><pi/> would be better as <ratiopi/>, to distinguish it from other >uses
 of \pi.
 >
 >Please likewise keep the euler on gamma as there are other things >called
 gamma.
 >Why does this get a series expansion but \pi does not?
 >
 >(No, I don't know what to call 'i' either.)

 these all need to be discussed; but the caveats about CD rules above
 apply.

 >And what is NaN doing in numbers:-)?  More pertinently, surely it >is not
 a K-12 concept?

 we need it for the replacement of the old <cn/> as far as I can remember.

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.kwarc.info/OM3/ticket/46#comment:1>
OpenMath <http://www.openmath.org>
The development of the OpenMath Standard and Content Dictionaries.