Abbreviated symbols are definitely a matter of input and output and not matter of semantic to my taste. However the need to declare a new symbol often has it's own reasons... merely stating that it should be handled by something else is not really a good answer.

There's a need to declare a symbol as "the same as, if you want to ignore this part of the world". The reason I suggested OWL at the time was that it does have abilities to declare that two classes are to be considered the specialization or the same thing provided you can see such a statement.

I absolutely know that FMPs can declare that one construct is equal to another but the geometry of facts is different. I think the right question that one should be able to answer is "what to do if I meet symbol bla-bla and can't do anything with it".

- an FMP that states that bla-bla is bla would be wrong, it would mean that bla-bla has no finer semantic - an FMP that states that bla-bla is a specialization of bla would allow the processor to ignore bla-bla and replace all occurrences of OMS-bla-bla to OMS-bla

Probably some other discovery effects should be analyzed.

paul


Le 22-févr.-09 à 04:52, "Professor James Davenport" <[email protected]> a écrit :


On Sat, February 21, 2009 8:16 pm, Christoph LANGE wrote:
On Saturday 21 February 2009 19:34:45 Professor James Davenport wrote:
It's come back to me. The ones we DO want are miles_per_hour etc., since
the abbreviation, mph, is non-standard.

Really? To my understanding it's wrong to represent such abbreviations on the OpenMath level. And, secondly, I find miles_per_hr in the OpenMath CDs, but I don't find any reference to "mph". So how did you represent
this abbreviation?
We didn't,because the whole question of "how do we handle abbreviations" wasn't fully worked out. At the time, DefMP didn't exist, never mind FMP
type="alias" or any of the other ideas now circulating.
<potential-bias type="omdoc kohlhase ...">
:-)
More generally, probably off-topic for this discussion, but nevertheless interesting (IMHO), a comment on what you said about abbreviations in your
MKM
2008 paper: I wouldn't agree with a representation of abbreviations by
introducing additional OpenMath symbols -- your two "alternative
definition" cases in that paper. I share your view that "this isn't an
OpenMath problem".
You suggested OWL as a solution. I don't completely agree with that. OK,
one
could introduce a string-valued OWL "datatype property" for annotating
OpenMath unit symbols with their abbreviation, e.g. leading to an
annotation like

http://www.openmath.org/cd/units_imperial1#miles_per_hr
http://www.openmath.org/ns/unit-annotation#abbrev
"mph".

(Recall my OM3 Trac posts about more flexible metadata; within such a
framework, one could even embed this into an OpenMath CD.)

But then, we'd require an application to know OWL, or at least this
particular annotation vocabulary.
True. The OWL suggestion was based on a worldview in which OWL becomes THE
answer, a world view which certainly hasn'tprevailed yet.
More naturally from my point of view is treating this problem as a problem of rendering OpenMath to presentation markup. For that, our (admittedly,
No - it's a bi-directional problem, I think. If not, then your suggestion
is at least plausible.
not-yet-standard) approach is defining notations, and we do that by
mapping
content markup patterns to presentation markup templates. That said, we
could
easily define a "presentation context" "abbreviated" and then map

units_imperial1#mile to "mi"
units_time1#hour to "hr"
(arith1#divide units_imperial1#mile units_time1#hour) to "mph".
Sorry - I don'tseehow this one works.
… i.e. solve the problem without introducing an additional symbol.
</potential-bias>

James Davenport
Visiting Full Professor, University of Waterloo
Otherwise:
Hebron & Medlock Professor of Information Technology and
Chairman, Powerful Computing WP, University of Bath
OpenMath Content Dictionary Editor
IMU Committee on Electronic Information and Communication

_______________________________________________
Om mailing list
[email protected]
http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Om mailing list
[email protected]
http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om

Reply via email to