From: Pankaj Kamthan <kamthan@cs.concordia.ca>

Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 17:57:55 -0400

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <3915AEA3.21790.A08A74@localhost>

Date: Sun, 7 May 2000 17:57:55 -0400

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <3915AEA3.21790.A08A74@localhost>

Here are some comments on Appendix C of the MathML 2.0 Draft. Hope they are useful. Pankaj Kamthan -- GENERAL 1. Differences in case. Some with <reference> and others with <Reference>. Examples: Compare C.2.3.2 <reference> M. Abramowitz and I. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, [4.2]</reference> and C.2.5.1 <Reference> M. Abramowitz and I. Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, [4.1] </Reference>. Same with use of <name> and <Name>. This should perhaps be consistent. 2. Some with and others not. See 1. This should perhaps be consistent. 3. In several MMLdefinition's, "periods" and "commas" are missing from appropriate places. 4. In several MMLdefinition's, both name and description is given (C.2.2.10); in others none of them are given (C.2.3.6). This should perhaps be consistent. 5. According to C.1.2, the "property" and "example" elements use MathML syntax. Why is "reln" continue to be used when it is deprecated in MathML 2.0? Example: C.2.1.1 and C.2.2.4, respectively. 6. Compare C.2.2.3 ... <MMLattribute> <name>definitionURL</name> <value> URL </value> <default> none </default> </MMLattribute> ... and C.2.3.2 ... <MMLattribute> <attname>definitionURL</attname> <attvalue> CDATA </attvalue> <attdefault> none </attdefault> </MMLattribute> <MMLattribute> <name>type</name> <values> any MathML Type </values> <default>real</default> </MMLattribute> ... a. Why do we have (different) names like <attname>, <attvalue> and <attdefault> in the second case? This should perhaps be consistent. b. How come their values are different? First case: URL; second case: CDATA. c. <values> -> <value> These problems seem to be generic (occurring in more than one sections). SPECIFIC C.1.2 ... as a child of the MMLDefinition at ... -> ... as a child of the MMLdefinition at ... C.2.2.5 definitionURL="www.w3c.org/MathML/Content/arcsin" -> definitionURL="http://www.w3c.org/MathML/Content/arcsin" C.2.5.2 The part "Also called the natural logarithm. The inverse of the exponential function." is incorrect. (It applies to ln(x).) C.2.2.8 1. delcared -> declared 2. ... <MMLattribute> <name>definitionURL</definition> <value> Any valid URL </value> </MMLattribute> ... Missing end tag for "name". C.2.2.9 "Lambda is a binary function, where the first argument is the variable and the second argument is a the expression." -> "Lambda is a binary function, where the first argument is the variable and the second argument is the expression." Why does the functorclass say "Nary"? C.2.2.10 1. etc. . -> etc. 2. <forall> -> <forall/> C.2.3.1 <reln/> -> <reln> and need the corresponding end tag. C.2.3.3 integerl -> integer C.2.3.23 compex -> complex <property>???</property> C.2.3.24 <ci>a</cn> Tag mismatch. <ci>&epsilon</cn> Tag mismatch and ";" missing from the general entity. <ci><mrow><msup><mi>a</mi><mi>b</mi><mrow></cn> Tag mismatch for ci. End tag for msup missing. Why are C.2.4.3, C.2.4.4, C.2.4.5, C.2.4.6 given a commutative property? gt, lt, geq, leq aren't commutative. (C.2.4.5 rightfully questions that.) C.2.5.2 Why isn't <property> log(1) = 0 </property> provided as a property (like C.2.5.1)? C.2.5.3 areguments - > arguments "<signature> (algebraic,bvar,interval) -> algebraic </signature>" Why only interval? We can have (presumably measurable) sets. See 4.4.5.1. C.2.5.5 (Binary) -> Binary C.2.5.8 quantifiy -> quantify C.2.5.9 "<property> ... </property>" If there is nothing in it, this line could be deleted. Same for C.2.6.8, C.2.6.9 C.2.6.11, C.2.8.7, and several others. The same idea for "<signature> ... </signature>" in C.2.7.1, C.2.7.2. C.2.6.3 "<signature> (set*) -> set </signature>" Shouldn't it be (set+ set) -> set? (I am assuming: * := 0 or more; + := 1 or more.) The same for C.2.6.4. C.2.6.7 Why is it (set*) -> boolean here and (set, set) -> boolean in C.2.6.8? Shouldn't they be same (to be (set+ set) -> boolean)? Same argument for C.2.6.9 and C.2.6.10. C.2.8.1 The line "<Reference> ditto, [4.3.27] </Reference>" could either be removed or should be added to other trigonometric functions C.2.8.2, ...) as well. What "ditto" means could be filled then. C.2.9.1 dimenions -> dimensions <values> random_variable | continuous_random_variable | data </value>: Tag mismatch. Same problems with C.2.9.2, C.2.9.3, C.2.9.6. C.2.9.4 discription -> description C.2.10.6 <signature>(matrix)->scalar* </property>: Tag mismatch.Received on Sunday, 7 May 2000 17:58:52 UTC

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