Re: interval (a recap)


This is just a quick note to acknowledge receipt your recent messages on
interval, and on type attributes.  We are currently working through responses
to the issues raised during last call, and I have included reminders of these
earlier concerns.  In particular, the issue of how to deal with \int_D f 
has will be addressed (clarified).


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andreas Strotmann" <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:54 AM
Subject: interval (a recap)

> Hi,
> here is another recap of a concern I've voiced over the last two years
> or so, rephrased to match the current draft.
>  - Dual role of <interval> as container and qualifier is problematic
> In an earlier message I pointed out that the dual role of the interval
> element as a constructor for an interval on the one hand and as a
> qualifier in an integral on the other is problematic.  I gave an example
> where this dual role can lead to notational ambiguities and unintuitive
> interpretations, at least, and problems marking up legitimate mathematical
> constructions.
> Is it really necessary to have interval as a qualifier?  I'm not sure if
> the integral, product, and sum operators (and their like) might not just
> come in one- and two-argument form, similar to OpenMath's representation,
> where the optional second argument would provide a set over which the
> operator ranges.  In the case of an interval, that second argument might
> then simply be constructed using interval not as a qualifier, but as a
> constructor/container element.
> This suggestion would also solve another problem that recently resurfaced
> in this discussion, namely
>  - allow something like    \int_{D} f  to be marked up in MathML
> This is not possible in the current draft, though compatibility to
> OpenMath should allow it (and it is apparently intended that this be
> allowed).  [Note that f may be a lambda expression or just a csymbol.]
>   --  Andreas
> ____________________________________________________________
> "The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today 
> all the exhilaration of a vice." -
> G.K.Chesterton: A Defense of Humilities, The Defendant, 1901 

Received on Friday, 9 June 2000 09:42:26 UTC