2010-07-17 16:42 Professor James Davenport <[email protected]>: > > OK, what does that mean for the annotation of the CDs with links to DLMF? > > Are > > you going to check for each CDDefinition that currently says "... as in > > A&S section ..." whether its FMPs correspond with the A&S (resp. DLMF) > > definition > I have already checked the A+S ones: > Corless,R.M., Davenport,J.H., Jeffrey,D.J. & Watt,S.M., > According to Abramowitz and Stegun. > SIGSAM Bulletin 34(2000) 2, pp. 58-65.
So you mean that the natural-language references from the CDs into the A&S book are correct, and that the A&S book defines the same functions as the CDs? And now you are going to check whether the DLMF also defines the same functions? > > Should I create a Trac ticket for that? > Might as well. OK, I will do so and put you on Cc. > I think I agree with you. But the IN MY VIEW (not necessarily the same as > Hayes-Halpin) asserting owl:sameAs is not something to be done lightly, > but requires the sort of check I am proposing to do. Indeed, so I will stay tuned (or I might start with rdfs:seeAlso, if we got the other issues settled). Cheers, Christoph -- Christoph Lange, Jacobs Univ. Bremen, http://kwarc.info/clange, Skype duke4701
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Om mailing list [email protected] http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om
