# interval (a recap)

From: Andreas Strotmann <strotman@cs.fsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 10:54:39 -0400 (EDT)

Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10006071032520.2354-100000@xi.cs.fsu.edu>
Hi,

here is another recap of a concern I've voiced over the last two years
or so, rephrased to match the current draft.

- Dual role of <interval> as container and qualifier is problematic

In an earlier message I pointed out that the dual role of the interval
element as a constructor for an interval on the one hand and as a
qualifier in an integral on the other is problematic.  I gave an example
where this dual role can lead to notational ambiguities and unintuitive
interpretations, at least, and problems marking up legitimate mathematical
constructions.

Is it really necessary to have interval as a qualifier?  I'm not sure if
the integral, product, and sum operators (and their like) might not just
come in one- and two-argument form, similar to OpenMath's representation,
where the optional second argument would provide a set over which the
operator ranges.  In the case of an interval, that second argument might
then simply be constructed using interval not as a qualifier, but as a
constructor/container element.

This suggestion would also solve another problem that recently resurfaced
in this discussion, namely

- allow something like    \int_{D} f  to be marked up in MathML

This is not possible in the current draft, though compatibility to
OpenMath should allow it (and it is apparently intended that this be
allowed).  [Note that f may be a lambda expression or just a csymbol.]

--  Andreas

____________________________________________________________
"The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today
all the exhilaration of a vice." -
G.K.Chesterton: A Defense of Humilities, The Defendant, 1901
www.chesterton.org/acs/quotes.htm

Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2000 10:54:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:30 UTC