From: Andreas Strotmann <andreas.strotmann@gmail.com>

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:12:38 +0100

Message-ID: <CAOcsBiHKiUmw9P17xcVCRHaZVnX58pypmPNTqzanM8ZO7-BEGw@mail.gmail.com>

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

Cc: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>, Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>, Daniel Marques <dani@wiris.com>, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286@cam.ac.uk>

Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:12:38 +0100

Message-ID: <CAOcsBiHKiUmw9P17xcVCRHaZVnX58pypmPNTqzanM8ZO7-BEGw@mail.gmail.com>

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

Cc: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>, Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>, Daniel Marques <dani@wiris.com>, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286@cam.ac.uk>

Sorry to butt in so late, but I think we would be remiss not to point out the rather obvious- namely, that MathML Content is fully equipped natively to support the functional programming style, but no other style. More to the point, a sequence of assignments would therefore 'naturally' be expressed as nested lambda expressions in MathML to preserve semantics. - Andreas Am 15.03.2012 15:47 schrieb "Bruce Miller" <bruce.miller@nist.gov>: > On 03/15/2012 10:24 AM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: > >> Many thanks to all of you (happy to have more comments, of course, but >> you have >> answered my concerns). There's always a requirement for *some* implicit >> semantics and I think I can see a fairly clear intuitive boundary now. >> >> Clearly scope is important and my current implementation uses a symbol >> table in >> the immediate parent <mathml/> (I assume that <mathml/> is not nestable, >> but in >> case it was this defines a scope. >> >> My other question is whether I can include foreign namespaces. I can see >> things >> like: >> > > You can, but it's not (purely) MathML anymore... > if that matters. > > As you said earlier in the thread: MathML has good > declarative power. But to express programming or > computations, you'll need imperative. > At least simple things like distinguishing > the declarative relationship k=0.1 from the > imperative assignment k=0.1. > > It isn't that MML or OM can't do that, but the > content dictionaries don't provide much. > > You'll have an easier time declaring the relationships > in MathML than expressing the demand for their computations > --- assuming your computational engine can figure out > what to do. However, if you do want to express the computations, > I would encourage you to at least consider how those could > be cast in MathML using apply, csymbol etc. and in particular > using a content dictionary with symbols for expressing those > imperatives. Could be useful to others! > > bruce > > >> <apply><eq/><ci>atomSet</ci><**apply><cml:getatoms/><cml:**molecule >> id="m3"/></apply> >> <foreach> >> <!-- iterate through the set --> >> <apply><eq/><cn>aw</cn><apply>**<cml:getMass/><cml:atom></**apply><apply> >> </foreach> >> > >Received on Tuesday, 20 March 2012 08:12:40 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:44 UTC
*