Re: Semantic Markup: mrow's are needed

Apologies for the delayed reply -- I put some blinders on for a few days to
grind out some code to linebreak/indent MathML.

I think David's second reply is the correct one as to my way of thinking.
Using my current (but now old) proposal:
<mrow notation="times(factorial(@1), factorial(#3))">
  <mi>m</mi>
  <mo>!</mo>
  <mi>n</mi>
  <mo>!</mo>
</mrow>

I think Deyan was aiming at something like that using his proposal's
notation, but I don't think it is right. Nowhere is "factorial" present.

    Neil

On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 7:57 AM Deyan Ginev <deyan.ginev@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The mini proposal also allows to annotate any presentation tree, but
> you sacrifice the granularity of the annotation - it floats higher. So
> Neil's tree can be annotated as (using the syntax that seemed to be
> the consensus form after yesterday's meeting):
>
> <mrow semantic="times(@factorial1(@base1),@factorial2(@base2))">
>   <mi arg="base1">m</mi>
>   <mo arg="factorial1">!</mo>
>   <mi arg="base2">n</mi>
>   <mo arg="factorial2">!</mo>
> </mrow>
>
> Greetings,
> Deyan
>
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:48 AM David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > On 26/06/2020 15:39, Neil Soiffer wrote:
> >
> > We have talked a little about needing proper mrow structure in order to
> mark up prefix/posfix/infix operators. For example, the following can not
> be semantically marked up:
> > <mrow>
> >   <mi>m</mi>
> >   <mo>!</mo>
> >   <mi>n</mi>
> >   <mo>!</mo>
> > </mrow>
> >
> > It needs an extra layer of mrows around the postfix factorials in the
> mrow.
> > <mrow>
> >   <mrow>
> >     <mi>m</mi>
> >     <mo>!</mo>
> >   </mrow>
> >   <mrow>
> >     <mi>n</mi>
> >     <mo>!</mo>
> >   </mrow>
> > </mrow>
> >
> >
> >
> > It seems the main problem (with both forms) is the missing invisible
> times.  Using the notation of one of the current proposals
> (semantics-mini)  you could do
> >
> >
> > <mrow
> >
> > semantic="@3(@2(@1),@5(@4))
> > >
> >
> >   <mi>m</mi>
> >   <mo semantic=factorial>!</mo>
> >   <mo>&invisibletimes;</mo>
> >   <mi>n</mi>
> >   <mo semantic=factorial>!</mo>
> >
> > </mrow>
> >
> >
> > Here's a case we haven't talked about: implicit mrows.
> > <msqrt>
> >   <mi>n</mi>
> >   <mo>!</mo>
> > </msqrt>
> >
> >
> > again can't you do
> >
> >
> > <msqrt semantic="sqrt(@2(@1))">
> >   <mi>n</mi>
> >   <mo semantic=factorial>!</mo>
> > </msqrt>
> >
> >
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Disclaimer
> >
> > The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England
> and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: Wilkinson
> House, Jordan Hill Road, Oxford OX2 8DR, United Kingdom. Please see our
> Privacy Notice for information on how we process personal data and for
> details of how to stop or limit communications from us.
> >
> > This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses and malware, and may have
> been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a
> Service (SaaS) for business.
>
>
>