Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f1D9VKH24281 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:20 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1D9VJd00684 . for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:19 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0959F.B8D9E400" Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1D9VIM22740 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA26579 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:18 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1D9VHM22736 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.89CF548E@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:07 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 487779 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:10 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA27089 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:08 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA51988 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:31:08 +0100 Received: from wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk (mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.0.15]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1D9Tfu11946 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:29:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.8.88] helo=cl.cam.ac.uk ident=rf) by wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.092 #1) id 14Sblb-0004Fr-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 13 Feb 2001 09:28:59 +0000 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:44:31 +0100." Return-Path: Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Why markup? Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 10:28:58 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Robin Fairbairns" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3871 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0959F.B8D9E400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >how do you do without markup in this case: > > > > The $a$ in the formula is a variable > > The usual remark on this: Can you parse it? :-) -- If you can parse = it, it > must be possible. Right? quite. when i was first thinking of switching to computer science (from mathematics) i went to the central library of the large city where my parents lived, and read all the books they had on computing. one (written ca. 1952, iirc) included a detailed description of the authors' algorithms for understanding and then translating natural languages. my first job, in 1968, was in an institute whose primary research "product" was a natural language parser. for two or more decades, this department has run a large (and pretty successful, by its own lights) group of researchers who study the same problems. none of these groups has yet "finished the job". they have some interesting results, but probably could not parse the awful english that i write. can we practically hypothecate a markup language that depends on comprehending natural language? surely not, even in the hans aberg universe? robin ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0959F.B8D9E400 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Why markup?

> >how do you do without markup in this = case:
> >
> >  The $a$ in the formula is a = variable
>
> The usual remark on this: Can you parse it? :-) = -- If you can parse it, it
> must be possible. Right?

quite.

when i was first thinking of switching to computer = science (from
mathematics) i went to the central library of the = large city where my
parents lived, and read all the books they had on = computing.  one
(written ca. 1952, iirc) included a detailed = description of the
authors' algorithms for understanding and then = translating natural
languages.

my first job, in 1968, was in an institute whose = primary research
"product" was a natural language = parser.

for two or more decades, this department has run a = large (and pretty
successful, by its own lights) group of researchers = who study the same
problems.

none of these groups has yet "finished the = job".  they have some
interesting results, but probably could not parse the = awful english
that i write.

can we practically hypothecate a markup language that = depends on
comprehending natural language?

surely not, even in the hans aberg universe?

robin

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0959F.B8D9E400--