- From: Robert Miner <rminer@geom.umn.edu>
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 09:40:46 -0500 (CDT)
- To: www-math@w3.org
- CC: jsdevitt@maplesoft.com, sb@stilo.com
Hi. Kostya Srebriany wrote: > Hello, All. > This example is from manual > <apply> > <fn occurrence="infix"><mo>±</mo></fn> > ... > > but in chap4_1.html said that 'occurrence' attribute may be used only > with <declare>. > In this case we may write just <fn><mo>±</mo></fn> because > PlusMinus is listed in dictionary. I think the <fn occurrence="infix"> example is an error. I copies Stan Devitt and Stephen Buswell on my message, so I hope we get confirmation. But I don't think 'occurrence' should be allowed anywhere except 'declare'. On the other hand, you examples clearly point out a problem here. It would be unbearable painful to have to use <declare>'s to specify how you want an operator with several forms to be used. > So, we may accept the 'occurrence' attribute in <fn>. > But if I want to write n@ in content murkup (n factorial, but for '!' > we use '@') I will fail because there is no predefined value 'postfix' > for the occurrence attribute. > > And second. > What should we render if we see > <apply> > <fn> > <mo>&SomeInfixOrPostfixOperator;</mo> > </fn> > <ci>x</ci> > </apply>? > Should we use the default value occurrence="Function-model" or use > 'form' of operator? > > I have many more questions on this topic. > May be someone have FAQ on it? ;-) > > Kostya I doubt if there is already a FAQ on it. Perhaps the thing to do is to start by making a list of examples showing the problems/ambiguities with the current model(s). We can look at them assuming either there is or is not an occurence attribute on <fn>. --Robert
Received on Wednesday, 12 August 1998 10:36:57 UTC