Unifying Math Ontologies: A tale of two standards
JH Davenport, M Kohlhase - International Conference on Intelligent …, 2009 - Springer
International Conference on Intelligent Computer Mathematics, 2009•Springer
One of the fundamental and seemingly simple aims of mathematical knowledge
management (MKM) is to develop and standardize formats that allow to “represent the
meaning of the objects of mathematics”. The open formats OpenMath and MathML address
this, but differ subtly in syntax, rigor, and structural viewpoints (notably over calculus). To
avoid fragmentation and smooth out interoperability obstacles, effort is under way to align
them into a joint format OpenMath/MathML 3. We illustrate the issues that come up in such …
management (MKM) is to develop and standardize formats that allow to “represent the
meaning of the objects of mathematics”. The open formats OpenMath and MathML address
this, but differ subtly in syntax, rigor, and structural viewpoints (notably over calculus). To
avoid fragmentation and smooth out interoperability obstacles, effort is under way to align
them into a joint format OpenMath/MathML 3. We illustrate the issues that come up in such …
Abstract
One of the fundamental and seemingly simple aims of mathematical knowledge management (MKM) is to develop and standardize formats that allow to “represent the meaning of the objects of mathematics”. The open formats OpenMath and MathML address this, but differ subtly in syntax, rigor, and structural viewpoints (notably over calculus). To avoid fragmentation and smooth out interoperability obstacles, effort is under way to align them into a joint format OpenMath/MathML 3. We illustrate the issues that come up in such an alignment by looking at three main areas: bound variables and conditions, calculus (which relates to the previous) and “lifted” n-ary operators.
Springer
