- From: Robert Miner <RobertM@dessci.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:47:12 -0500
- To: Strotmann@rrz.uni-koeln.de
- CC: www-math@w3.org
Hi Andreas,
> The misunderstanding may be about <forall/> being required to be used
> within the context of an apply element. That refers to the apply
> element within which the forall element is embedded, however, and
> therefore there is no problem if there is no apply element as a sibling
> of the forall element.
That may be the sensible interpretation, but it isn't how the spec is
written. From 4.3.17:
"The forall element represents the universal quantifier of logic. It
must be used in conjunction with one or more bound variables, an
optional condition element, and an assertion, which should take the
form of an apply element. In MathML 1.0, the reln element was also
permitted here: this usage is now deprecated."
And from the validation grammer, C.2.3.18:
"Signature
(bvar*,condition?,apply) -> boolean
(bvar*,condition?,(reln)) -> boolean "
--Robert
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Robert Miner RobertM@dessci.com
MathML 2.0 Specification Co-editor 651-223-2883
Design Science, Inc. "How Science Communicates" www.dessci.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 6 May 2003 10:47:23 UTC