[Trac] [OpenMath] #48: CD set1
OpenMath
trac at strawberry.eecs.jacobs-university.de
Fri Sep 12 15:02:59 CEST 2008
#48: CD set1
------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
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:'''
>
> I cannot follow the description of <map/>. It seems to be something to
> do with mapping functions over collections. Is this a K-12 thing?
>
> Also, this is not what the word 'map' or 'mapping' normally means in
> K-12 maths.
>
> The description of 'suchthat' gives only the software view. Also,it does
> not allow for the possibility that the object described (but probably not
> constructed) is not a set.
>
> 'The set entries are given explicitly.' Does the use of a function that
> is not effectively computable count as 'explicit'?
>
> The general level of the descriptions in this section suggests that it
> would be appropriate to point out that for the formulation of mathematics
> being assumed here, some of these ideas are 'primitives'. My favourite
> foundation uses only one undefined symbol: <in/>.
>
> <map/> this meaning of map can be applied not only to a set; it is
> most often applied to lists/sequences. If it si applied to a set it
> most naturally produces a multi-set wheich then defines a set.
>
> '''Michael:'''
>
> >I cannot follow the description of <map/>. It seems to be something to
> do with mapping functions over collections. Is this a K-12 thing?
>
> It is a discrete Math thing that is also often used in CS.
New description:
'''Chris:'''
I cannot follow the description of <map/>. It seems to be something to
do with mapping functions over collections. Is this a K-12 thing?
Also, this is not what the word 'map' or 'mapping' normally means in
K-12 maths.
The description of 'suchthat' gives only the software view. Also,it does
not allow for the possibility that the object described (but probably not
constructed) is not a set.
'The set entries are given explicitly.' Does the use of a function that is
not effectively computable count as 'explicit'?
The general level of the descriptions in this section suggests that it
would be appropriate to point out that for the formulation of mathematics
being assumed here, some of these ideas are 'primitives'. My favourite
foundation uses only one undefined symbol: <in/>.
<map/> this meaning of map can be applied not only to a set; it is
most often applied to lists/sequences. If it si applied to a set it
most naturally produces a multi-set wheich then defines a set.
Comment (by jauecker):
'''Michael:'''
>I cannot follow the description of <map/>. It seems to be something to
do with mapping functions over collections. Is this a K-12 thing?
It is a discrete Math thing that is also often used in CS.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.kwarc.info/OM3/ticket/48#comment:4>
OpenMath <http://www.openmath.org>
The development of the OpenMath Standard and Content Dictionaries.
More information about the Trac
mailing list