- From: Stan Devitt <jsdevitt@stratumtek.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:13:42 -0400
- To: Mathematics <maths@mathsonly.com>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
For the record:
1. The decision to allow presentation inside of <ci>...</ci> was deliberate. The
view was that a "symbol" could have a very complicated appearance and still be
treated as a single symbol for the purposes of content mathml.
2. For elipses in sums and sequences I have taken a more formal approach than has
been suggested so far. I defined a function - roughly
special_seq( base, operand , before_index_low, before_index_high,
elipse_token , after_index_low, after_index_high )
so that
special_seq( a , "+" , 1 , 3 , "..." , n-1 , n )
can be mapped to the presentation
a_1 + a_2 + a_3 + ... + a_{n-1} + a_n
and to the computational form
Sum( a_i , i=1..n );
There is no ambiguity (at least no more than usual) for either the computation
or presentation. Of course a transform is required.
Stan Devitt
in response to:
> <ci><msub><ci>a</ci><ci>i</ci></msub></ci> (*)
>
and
>
>
> >aside of the encoding problem of a_i you have such problems
> >as encoding the ellipsis a_1, ..., a_k,
...
> Look forward to your opinions,
> Charles Lyons.
Received on Thursday, 6 October 2005 20:15:59 UTC