Professor James Davenport skrev 2011-01-25 17.42: > On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Lars Hellström wrote: >> Michael Kohlhase skrev 2011-01-25 08.46: >> My gut feeling for the \text part is that this is an alternate markup for >> some combination of formal symbols, and should be encoded as such, i.e., as >> the value of some hypothetical altenc/vernacular symbol. Totally ignoring the >> cd's of symbols, that would make the \text part equivalent something like: > certainly nice if one can do it, but quite often one uses text becuase > there aren't standard symbols for what one wants, I fear.
As long as some CD defines the symbol it should be OK. Or is your point that OMDOC documents must be able to employ undefined concepts? >> <OMA> >> <OMATTR> >> <OMATP> >> <OMS cd="altenc" name="vernacular"/> >> <OMBIND> >> <OMS name="lambda"/> >> <OMBVAR> <OMV name="Clause1"/> <OMV name="Clause2"/> </OMBVAR> >> <OMA><OMS name="concat-text"/> >> <OMV name="Clause1"/> <OMSTR> and</OMSTR> <OMV >> name="Clause2"/> >> </OMA> >> </OMBIND> >> </OMATP> >> <OMS name="logical-and"/> > By this do you mean the usual<OMS cd="logic1" name="and"/> > or something else? The usual "and", yes. (I simply didn't have the time to look up what standard CD defines it. Same thing with "set-in" and "lambda". I don't know how well "concat-text" can be identified with anything standard.) >> </OMATTR> >> <OMA><OMS name="set-in"/> >> <OMV name="a"/> <OMV name="T"/> >> </OMA> >> <OMA> >> <OMATTR> >> <OMATP> >> <OMS cd="altenc" name="vernacular"/> >> <OMBIND> >> <OMS name="lambda"/> >> <OMBVAR> >> <OMV name="term1"/> <OMV name="term2"/> <OMV name="term3"/> >> </OMBVAR> >> <OMA><OMS name="concat-text"/> >> <OMV name="term1"/> <OMSTR> terminates for</OMSTR> >> <OMV name="term2"/> <OMSTR> with</OMSTR> <OMV name="term3"/> >> </OMA> >> </OMBIND> >> </OMATP> >> <OMS name="terminates-for-with"/> > And this, of course, is a symbol we don't (currently) have. But any author using the concept in an OM-enabled document ought to create a definition of it if none already exists. >> </OMATTR> >> <OMV name="P"/> >> <OMV name="a"/> >> <OMV name="b"/> >> </OMA> >> </OMA> >> >> At least for the most common uses of text within math, namely logical >> conjunctions, this should be the natural way to go as it allows tools >> ignorant of natural language to process the formula. >> >> Lars Hellström >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Om mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Om mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om _______________________________________________ Om mailing list [email protected] http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om
