I'm in the same position as Lars: random teaching commitments Sent from my iPhone
On 7 Oct 2013, at 10:35, Lars Hellström <[email protected]> wrote: > Michael Kohlhase skrev 2013-10-01 09.04: >> Dear all, >> >> the summer is over, and the dust of the new semester (for me) has somewhat >> settled, so we should get on with our mandate to look at extension of OM2, >> possibly with a view towards an OpenMath 3 standard. I have attached JHD's >> meeting minutes; here are the relevant parts, with my comments inline >> >> > MK listed some change suggestions. >> > 1. Better rˆole system (MK/FR) >> > 2. n-ary binders (see Hellstr ̈om’s second presentation) >> > 3. first-class sequences (Horozal/Kohlhase) >> > 4. first-class records (Kohlhase) >> > 5. flexForm CDs >> > 6. Notation Definitions >> > 7. DefMPs >> > 8. Document/develop CD writing tools (see Hellstr ̈om’s first presentation) >> > 9. Recognise Content MathML as an encoding. >> > 10. Bug reports >> >> Some of these issues are already raised (and discussed in the TRAC at >> http://trac.mathweb.org/OM3 I propose to just adopt the TRAC as an open >> resource for discussion and planning. > > This seems natural. (Pity though that it, as I recall things, was said at the > meeting that a *new* tracker would be set up for the new enhancement process; > waiting for that to happen was a major reason for me to bother people about > the infrastructure work. If it instead had been stated that the existing > tracker would be used, then I would probably have filed some issue during the > summer.) > > Be warned, though, that TRAC is a somewhat heavyweight tracker system, where > the purposes of many bells and whistles (milestones, due dates, assignment, > etc.) are unclear to the beginner, especially in the context that we will be > using it. There should be some sort of an executive summary document for how > we will be using it in this enhancement process, that clarifies what is > important (and how it should be interpreted) and what does not. > > Process-wise, I think there are three important categories for the issues: > * Issues that need to be dealt with before MathML3 standardisation. > * Issues that are OM2.0 errata/clarifications. > * Issues that are new features (and would require a version number increment). > I suspect these might qualify as "milestones", but I'm not completely sure > about that. There are also a bunch of old milestones in the TRAC which should > perhaps be retired (if possible), since they don't correspond much to the > present process and will therefore be confusing. > >> Everyone interested is invited to make >> an account at https://trac.mathweb.org/register/register and tell me the >> account name (please no funny characters and blanks) and I will give you >> permissions. > > I believe I did that in a separate mail, yes? > > [snip] >> We should also have a kick-off skype meeting; would next week suit >> (generally, I will set up a doodle). > > Is a doodle forthcoming? For me, I suppose this week is about as good (or > bad) as any other: some hours I can't due to teaching, other hours I can. > > Lars Hellström > _______________________________________________ Om3 mailing list [email protected] http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om3
