On Wed, 24 Sep 2008, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > Making them n-ary doesn't solve the classical writing of > a < b > c > which is used quite often still. Is it? Oh my God .... I assume one can therefore say a < b > c < d > e ... (where e is not necessarily the base of the natural logarithms) > So another workaround is neither whatsoever and I think it should be at the > notations' level. Hear here. James _______________________________________________ Om3 mailing list [email protected] http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om3
- [Om3] binary vs n-ary relations Michael Kohlhase
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary relations Professor James Davenport
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary relations Paul Libbrecht
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary relations Professor James Davenport
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary relations Bruce Miller
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary relat... Professor James Davenport
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-ary ... Paul Libbrecht
- Re: [Om3] binary vs n-... Professor James Davenport
- Re: [Om3] binary v... Michael Kohlhase
- Re: [Om3] binary v... Professor James Davenport
- Re: [Om3] binary v... Michael Kohlhase
- Re: [Om3] binary v... Michael Kohlhase
- Re: [Om3] binary v... David Carlisle
- Re: [Om3] binary v... Michael Kohlhase
