Re: comments re draft version 2.0
Stan Devitt <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> O(x) could be written.
> <apply><csymbol definitionURL="CRCStandardMath_30"
> <apply><csymbol definitionURL="...">floor</csymbol> ...</apply>
[plus a recommendation to use mixed content-presentation style so the
floor actually looks right]
So, is there a good rationale for including basic freshman/sophomore
statistics notation like <sdev/> while forcing equally basic
freshman/sophomore discrete math and computer science notation like O,
floor to go through these unstandardized and unpretty convolutions?
Re my third point, chains of inequalities (or of subset relations, or
other partial orders), the suggestion was to represent it as a
conjunction of binary relations. I respect the point that it may be
difficult to come up with a correct definition of a valid chain (although
it seems simple enough to me to require all relations in a chain to be
equality, inequality, and strict inequality from a common partial order),
but a chain is semantically different from a conjunction, in that it has
the additional requirement that the rhs of one inequality be identical to
the lhs of the next, so that one can automatically apply transitivity to
deduce a relation between any two members of the chain. I thought the
purpose of content style over presentation style was to preserve useful
David Eppstein UC Irvine Dept. of Information & Computer Science