Re: ***MATH***

Ka-Ping Yee (
Wed, 17 Jul 1996 12:08:33 +0900

Message-Id: <>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 1996 12:08:33 +0900
From: Ka-Ping Yee <>
To: "Marcus E. Hennecke" <>
Subject: Re: ***MATH***

Marcus E. Hennecke wrote:
> Not true. The problem with LaTeX's way to write math is that the computer
> can't make sense out of it. It is not structural.
> But why should the computer know? Because of the need for device
> independence. What if you want to speak the formula? Then you need to
> know what the integrand and what the integration variable is.

Yes!  This kind of clarity is exactly what i am after.  As some of
the examples on my site show, it really doesn't cost the author
more work or typing to achieve this clarity, either.

In fact, because the author can just say what he/she means instead
of worrying about layout details, often the expression is *more*
concise this way as compared to what you'd have to do for Arena or
even for LaTeX.  Mathematics is perfect for a structural notation.

> As far as I can see, Ping's efforts go in the same direction.

Yes!  Thank goodness someone understands what this is all about.