|
From: | William Sit |
Subject: | Re: [Axiom-developer] Design Thoughts on Semantic Latex (SELATEX) |
Date: | Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:22:33 +0000 |
Hi Tim:
A question: how would you handle overloading of operators like * ("multiplication") in a semantic mark-up? Need the markup be as detailed as the compiler requires or just sloppy enough that the interpreter can figure out the correct semantic?
William
William Sit
Professor Emeritus Department of Mathematics The City College of The City University of New York New York, NY 10031
homepage: wsit.ccny.cuny.edu
From: Axiom-developer <axiom-developer-bounces+address@hidden> on behalf of Tim Daly <address@hidden>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 6:17 AM To: Dan Zwillinger Cc: Richard Fateman; James Davenport; address@hidden; Mike Dewar; axiom-dev; address@hidden Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] Design Thoughts on Semantic Latex (SELATEX) My initial approach was too heavy-handed and Axiom specific.
It seems the semantic markup task can be viewed as an editor the \int is really integrate
the dx is to be ignored and
the ax+b should read a*x+b
There is an obvious tradeoff of markup vs weaver.
For example. \int might be known to weaver. Or expressions might call an equation rewriter to add {*}
The markup could vary from almost nothing to massive detail
depending on the downstream cleverness.
This initial markup set seems sufficient to handle every task
that requires semantics markup so far. The overhead seems
small and the gain seems large.
Now the only problem is post-processing the latex. Sigh.
There is no such thing as a simple job. Tim
On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Tim Daly
<address@hidden> wrote:
|
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |