[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: [mizar] vocabularies






On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Grzegorz Bancerek wrote:

The FM translation technology should rather use notation (pattern) for mapping to TeX than the symbol level, because one Mizar symbol can have very different contexts of use, and possibly very different TeX notations (I think we already talked about this one with Grzegorz some time ago).

In FM translation the only almost but not quite unlike stable resource is used:
formats (symbol+arity). For example, plus in expressions x+y, x+, +x etc.
may have different presentation in LaTeX. Namely, the first and third pluses are
represented just by + but the second by ^+
Of course, there are bigger differences in translation for other symbols.

Patterns uses types of arguments annotated with constructors which change from version to version of distribution. Maintenance of translation patterns based on
such resource may be quite interesting.

I think there is one simple option: keep the TeX symbol in the article with the definition if needed. There could still be the current table on the format level used as a default (e.g. x+y will most often be x+y in TeX), and the info from patterns would override the format default (if there is any).

My knowledge of the current FM translation technology is limited, but I think this could take care of the maintenance problem and also allow the users to easily provide new TeX presentation info directly in the article (without learning about FM formats).

Josef