I totally agree with Josef. The ICMS demo
<http://www.cs.ru.nl/~freek/demos/> _very_ clearly showed how
inferior Mizar was in this respect. Look at the "environment"
parts of the various formalizations:
Isabelle:
"imports Complex"
HOL Light:
"needs "Multivariate/misc.ml;;"
ProofPower:
"open_theory "analysis";"
Coq:
"Require Imports Reals.
Require Imports Fourier."
Mizar:
"vocabularies ARYTM, ARYTM_1, RELAT_1, ARYTM_3, FUNCT_1, ABSVALUE, SEQ_4,
SEQ_2;
notations SUBSET_1, ORDINAL1, NUMBERS, XREAL_0, REAL_1, COMPLEX1, FUNCT_1,
RELSET_1, FUNCT_2, SEQ_4, XXREAL_0, PARTFUN3;
constructors PARTFUN1, XXREAL_0, REAL_1, COMPLEX1, PARTFUN3;
registrations RELSET_1, XREAL_0, MEMBERED, SEQ_1, RELAT_1, FUNCT_2;
requirements NUMERALS, SUBSET, BOOLE, ARITHM, REAL;
definitions SEQ_4;
theorems XREAL_1, COMPLEX1, SEQ_1, SEQ_4, FUNCT_1, FUNCT_2, XCMPLX_1,
ABSVALUE;"
See my point? Also, fighting with the environment is one of
the things that I really hate most in writing a Mizar article.
Which is a pity, as the notations and clusters and so on, they
are wonderful. But you should be able to get them by just
saying "give me all!" and go from there.