subscripts on operators (etc)

To: Neil Soiffer <soiffer@wolfram.com>
Subject: subscripts on operators (etc)
From: raman@mv.us.adobe.com (T. V. Raman)
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 11:46:03 -0700
Cc: w3c-math-erb@w3.org
From raman@mv.us.adobe.com Sun Apr 28 14: 46:39 1996
In-Reply-To: <199604280527.AAA09410@morrison.wolfram.com>
Message-Id: <199604281846.LAA03886@lapdog.mv.us.adobe.com>
References: <199604280527.AAA09410@morrison.wolfram.com>

I agree with your statement about parsing "embillished" operators.

I managed to do this fairly successfully in AsTeR when parsing TeX.

As you indicate, the process is to first gather up the embellishments
on operators, and then treat the embellished operators just like their
unembellished counterparts in the operator precedence.

Re: the integrals:

In my collection of examples, you will find a rather inoquous looking
integral that I currently know of no clean way of parsing.

Consider the expression:

\int {\dx \over x}  =  \log x

The problems arise because the written notation does not mention the
"1" which is the numerator of the integrand. 

-- 



Best Regards,
____________________________________________________________________________
--raman

      Adobe Systems                 Tel: 1 (415) 962 3945   (B-1 115)
      Advanced Technology Group     Fax: 1 (415) 962 6153 
      1585 Charleston Road          Email: raman@adobe.com 
      Mountain View, CA 94039 -7900  raman@cs.cornell.edu 
      http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Info/People/raman/raman.html  (Cornell)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed are my own and in no way should be taken
            as representative of my employer, Adobe Systems Inc.
____________________________________________________________________________

References:

subscripts on operators (etc)

From: Neil Soiffer <soiffer@wolfram.com>

Prev: parsing dx buried in integrands
Next: Re: Progress on Parsing
Index: Message index of w3c-math@w3.org mailing list
Thread: Thread index of w3c-math@w3.org mailing list