From: Stan Devitt <jsdevitt@stratumtek.com>

Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 08:20:37 -0400

Message-ID: <3F1A8915.7010301@stratumtek.com>

To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>

CC: www-math@w3.org

Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 08:20:37 -0400

Message-ID: <3F1A8915.7010301@stratumtek.com>

To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>

CC: www-math@w3.org

The construction <set> <bvar>...</bvar> <condition> ... </condition> <list><ci>i</ci><ci>c</ci></list> </set> is a sort of shorthand for constructing sets like <set> <list><ci>1</ci><ci>2.54</ci></list> <list><ci>2</ci><ci>5.08</ci></list> ... </set> The last term in the constructor is an "instance" of the set elements that are to be constructed. (I could have built a set of sets, but I've already seen one published map claiming that 1 km = 1.6 miles :) ) The set is actually built by using the conditions to select valid pairs of bvar values and then for each such pair constructing an actual element ( in this case a list) It corresponds in a very real sense to the notation { ( i , c ) | conditions on i and c go here } Stan Devitt StratumTek Roger L. Costello wrote: >Is the purpose of: > > <list><ci>i</ci><ci>c</ci></list> > >to indicate "these are the set variables"? > >Is there an advantage of using <list>...</list> rather than set, i.e., > > <set><ci>i</ci><ci>c</ci></set> > >Thanks! /Roger > > >Received on Sunday, 20 July 2003 08:18:33 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:34 UTC
*