- From: Andreas Strotmann <Strotmann@rrz.uni-koeln.de>
- Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 09:46:42 +0200
- To: Tim Bagot <tsb-w3-math-0003@earth.li>
- CC: "'www-math@w3.org'" <www-math@w3.org>, Gang Du <GangDu@dessci.com>
<apply> <forall/> <bvar> <ci> x </ci> </bvar> <condition> <apply> <lt/> <ci> x </ci> <cn> 0 </cn> </apply> </condition> <ci> x </ci> </apply> is perfectly fine Content MathML stating what you requested. It just doesn't have a reasonable meaning that I could figure out, but Content MathML was never meant to preclude stating silly things, or things that only make sense with additional context definitions. The misunderstanding may be about <forall/> being required to be used within the context of an apply element. That refers to the apply element within which the forall element is embedded, however, and therefore there is no problem if there is no apply element as a sibling of the forall element. -- Andreas Tim Bagot wrote: >At 2003-05-05T10:03-0700, Gang Du wrote:- > > > >>In MathML 2 specification, content markup element <forall> must be >>used in conjunction with one or more bound variables, an optional >>condition element, and an assertion which should be an <apply> >>element or a deprecated <reln> element. Consider the following >>statement: "for all x, x < 0, x". Since the assertion here is >>just a single variable, how to translate this into a valid content >>markup? Or this is not a valid forall statement? >> >> > >The last part is meant to be a predicate, so that's not likely to be a >sensible forall statement. However, "forall x, x in X, x" might just be. >Even so, that is really a pathological case, and I don't think it would >be overly painful to apply the identity function. > > >Tim Bagot > > >
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2003 03:46:50 UTC