2010-07-17 21:30 Professor James Davenport <[email protected]>: > On Sat, July 17, 2010 6:51 pm, Christoph LANGE wrote: > > 2010-07-17 16:42 Professor James Davenport <[email protected]>: > >> > Should I create a Trac ticket for that? > >> Might as well.
http://trac.mathweb.org/OM3/ticket/122 > Thanks. I am slightly worried by Urs' comments, though only slightly (One > could argue that the 'author' is the author of the chapter, not the author > of the 'sin' section). Bruce's answer will help us with that. > Of course, one option (not that I necessarily support it) would be to > annotate FMPs as being the same as DLMF's equations, not the whole > function. That would be a reasonable alternative, because one could argue that the DLMF does not describe functions, but rather _properties_ of functions. But then we get a problem with OpenMath: The OpenMath CD language supports annotations inside OpenMath objects, but not inside CD elements, e.g. an FMP itself cannot be annotated. Such annotations would have to be stored externally from the CDs, e.g. in RDF files, or (Heaven forbid! ;-) in OMDoc variants of the CDs. Storing the annotations in external RDF files would make them harder to maintain, and harder to use for anything except serving RDF to linked data clients, but I'd really like to include these links in the XHTML renderings of the CDs. > David Carlisle's comments worries me more, but I need to think about it. I will stay tuned for David's reply, maybe it was just a little misunderstanding between him and me, on how to translate csymbol/@definitionURL into an OMS. 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
