Re: Reminder: MathML Semantics meeting, Thursday, 6 August

Those are all good things to add. I certainly hope we can obsolete the
MathML note that says to use class="MathML-unit" once we have a semantics
proposal.

Re chemistry: I was on the Chem CG call this morning and requested that
they come up with "semantics" for chemistry. They previously did a bunch of
work to narrow down the subject areas needed to disambiguate chemistry from
math, so they have a start on what the targets are they need to identify.

    Neil


On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 7:38 AM Deyan Ginev <deyan.ginev@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for starting that list Sam and Neil!
>
> I would volunteer the following notable names for consideration in our
> meeting discussion, as possible extensions. It may help to draw
> contrasts to your pragmatic cMML list and quickly reject/accept types
> of names, so that we figure out what gives a name the right to "go in"
> vs stay out of the level 1 list of meanings:
>
> 1. all SI units and imperial units
> 2. other notable K12 constants from STEM e.g.
>  - chemistry: all atoms from the  table of elements, molecule,
> Avogadro's number/mole
>  - math: geometric constructs (angle, segment, point)
> 3. notable K12 operators from STEM e.g.
>  - chemistry: reaction arrows
>  - math: different kinds of intervals (open-closed, closed-open),
> geometric relations (parallel to, intersecting), piecewise function
> definitions
>  - more math: modulo, divisible by
> 4. notable K12 properties from STEM e.g.
>   - chemistry: "positive/negative ions" (usually denoted via
> msup-plus, msup-minus over an atom base))
>   - physics: the little arrows denoting "force", e.g. \vec{F}
>
>
> Of course I don't expect us to cover the entire K12 curriculum's
> concepts in an initial list, and likely there is a good argument to be
> made about a very small core list, and adjacent level 2, level 3 lists
> with hundreds and then thousands of concepts that are not normative.
> I'm curious to hear how everyone is thinking about conceptually
> separating the levels, and about the degree to which the group would
> have a burden to maintain these lists going forward. I could also
> imagine "blessing" an external resource as a source of provenance for
> these names, e.g. "any official meaning literal must have a wikipedia
> page/wikidata resource". As a reminder, my main focus is coverage, as
> my main application scenario is enriching arXiv, so apologies that I
> keep drifting to the topic of maximizing breadth.
>
> Greetings,
> Deyan
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 8:58 PM Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > We meet again on Thursday, 6 August at 10am Pacific, 1pm Eastern, 7pm
> Central European Time.
> >
> > Agenda:
> > 1. Charter comments, suggestions, discussion
> > 2. Sam and I have created an initial list based on pragmatic MathML
> >    a) Discussion of how the list was created, etc
> >    b) Are more fields needed/existing fields need changing?
> >    c) What should be removed (some are clearly not appropriate)?
> >    d) What should be added?
> >    e) Names -- naming scheme and do we want to keep some content MathML
> names (e.g., "lt" or spell out as "lessthan")?
> > 3) Continued discussion on "semantics"
> >
> > The zoom meeting link is the same one we used last week. Hopefully the
> calendar invite doesn't have any more hidden bad links. Due to zoombombing,
> I can't send it out to the public mailing list. If you would like to join
> and don't have the link, please send me email at least 10 minutes before
> the meeting.
>