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 f1EKXcH04404 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:38 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1EKXcd07763 . for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:38 +0100 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 f1EKXbM02459 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:37 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C096C5.68F53D00" 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 VAA22268 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:36 +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 f1EKXaM02455 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:36 +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 <10.3C047F0E@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:28 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489115 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:33 +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 VAA29965 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:31 +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 VAA55288 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:32 +0100 Received: from ns.mccme.ru (ns.mccme.ru [195.133.68.22]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1EKXWx06650 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:33:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from cherepan.UUCP (uucp@localhost) by ns.mccme.ru (8.8.5/8.8.5) with UUCP id XAA16062 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:11:50 +0300 Received: by cherepan.mccme.ru (dMail for DOS v2.07b5, 02Jan00); Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:22:22 +0300 Lines: 42 References: Your message of "Mon, 12 Feb 2001 19:44:31 +0100." Return-Path: X-Mailer: dMail [Demos Mail for DOS v2.07b5] Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Why markup? Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:22:22 +0100 Message-ID: <2.07b5.RCBL.G8RKLA@cherepan.mccme.ru> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Alexander Cherepanov" 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: 3926 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C5.68F53D00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 13-Feb-01 14:45 Hans Aberg wrote: > Otherwise, I stated the general principle, the better the parsing = becomes, > the less markup will be needed (or the more sophisticated it can be). The question is "can markup be avoided completely?" I bet no. > As for that natural language parsing problem, one problem is that = humans, > using their massively parallel supercomputers, can scan a sentence and = try > many different patterns. Let's try parsing the Frank Mittelbach = example: > The a in the formula is a variable. > You would probably use the context knowledge that it is composed of > English > and Math and scan it to recognize that the second "a", but not the = first, > is a indefinite article. Then from that, you would infer that the = first > "a" > must be a math symbol, which is supported by the semantic information = of > the wording "in the formula". As for a math environment, how will you parse (without math markup) the = last sentence in the following example: ($G$ acts on a manifold $M$. $G_1,G_2,A$ --- subgroups of $G$. $X$ = --- a submanifold of $M$. $a \in A, p \in X$.) $$ L =3D \{ ga \cdot p \mid \mskip10mu p \in X \} $$ $$ M =3D \{ g \cdot ap \mid \mskip15mu g \in G_1, p \in X = \} $$ $$ N =3D \{ gap \mid \mskip20mu g \in G_2 \} $$ Editor writes: The gap in the last formula [i.e. \mskip20mu] should = be made like in the first one and the $gap$ should be made like in the second one. The following example is not that serious :-) (and, in fact, I'ld write $\mathfrak{so}$ instead of $so$): This Lie algebra is $so_n(\mathbb C)$. Let's see why it is so [or $so$?]. Somebody with better English (and maybe with experience in other fields of math) will find better examples, I think. Sasha ------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C5.68F53D00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Why markup?

13-Feb-01 14:45 Hans Aberg wrote:
> Otherwise, I stated the general principle, the = better the parsing becomes,
> the less markup will be needed (or the more = sophisticated it can be).

The question is "can markup be avoided = completely?"
I bet no.

> As for that natural language parsing problem, one = problem is that humans,
> using their massively parallel supercomputers, = can scan a sentence and try
> many different patterns. Let's try parsing the = Frank Mittelbach example:
>     The a in the formula is = a variable.
> You would probably use the context knowledge = that it is composed of
> English
> and Math and scan it to recognize that the = second "a", but not the first,
> is a indefinite article. Then from that, you = would infer that the first
> "a"
> must be a math symbol, which is supported by the = semantic information of
> the wording "in the formula".

As for a math environment, how will you parse (without = math markup) the last
sentence in the following example:

    ($G$ acts on a manifold $M$. = $G_1,G_2,A$ --- subgroups of $G$. $X$ ---
    a submanifold of $M$. $a \in A, p = \in X$.)
          &nbs= p; $$ L =3D \{ ga \cdot p  \mid  \mskip10mu p \in X \} = $$
          &nbs= p; $$ M =3D \{ g \cdot ap  \mid  \mskip15mu g \in G_1, p \in X = \} $$
          &nbs= p; $$ N =3D \{ gap         = \mid  \mskip20mu g \in G_2 \} $$
    Editor writes: The gap in the last = formula [i.e. \mskip20mu] should be
    made like in the first one and the = $gap$ should be made like in the
    second one.

The following example is not that serious :-) (and, in = fact, I'ld write
$\mathfrak{so}$ instead of $so$):

    This Lie algebra is $so_n(\mathbb = C)$. Let's see why it is so [or
    $so$?].

Somebody with better English (and maybe with = experience in other fields
of math) will find better examples, I think.

Sasha

------_=_NextPart_001_01C096C5.68F53D00--