From: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>

Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:58:18 -0400

Message-id: <4A69BDFA.9000007@nist.gov>

To: Christoph LANGE <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>

Cc: Urs Holzer <urs@andonyar.com>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:58:18 -0400

Message-id: <4A69BDFA.9000007@nist.gov>

To: Christoph LANGE <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>

Cc: Urs Holzer <urs@andonyar.com>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

On 07/24/2009 09:24 AM, Christoph LANGE wrote: > In the very general case, you don't always get a unique answer, While I don't doubt this is true... as functions > can also occur as constants, i.e. without arguments. E.g. instead of sin x or > sin(x) you'd have statements like "let f = sin, then f(x) = ...", or "the > [function] vector space spanned by the set {sin, cos}". I'm sure this is also > true for certain function symbols that have their own Unicode characters. But > actually it might not make a difference for you, as I think the current concensus is that functions, like sin, should always be marked up as <mi> (preferably followed by <mo>⁡</mo>, when applied). Of course, the distinction here between a function and a prefix operator is not so completely clear, and is likely more related to syntax than semantics. Presumably infix & postfix must always be <mo>, even if one wanted to think of them as a function rather than operator, since ⁡ doesn't help. > * it is possibly admissible to write function constants as<mo> as well (@all: > is it?) > * functions applied to arguments occur much more frequently than function > constants > > Cheers, > > Christoph >Received on Friday, 24 July 2009 13:59:17 GMT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50
: Saturday, 20 February 2010 06:13:05 GMT
*