Ticket #671 (closed defect: wontfix)

Opened 17 months ago

Last modified 17 months ago

Precedences the wrong way around

Reported by: uholzer Owned by: dmisev
Priority: major Milestone: Release v1.3.0
Component: [SI] NTN Version:
Keywords: Cc: kohlhase, clange
Blocked By: Blocking:
Due to close: YYYY/MM/DD Include in GanttChart: no
Dependencies: Due to assign: YYYY/MM/DD

Description

According to the MKM08 paper about notations, a lower precedence means "binds stronger". (That is, if I understand that correctly, when the output precedence is smaller than the input precedence, no brackets are added.) Christoph Lange told me that the precedences are interpreted as in Prolog, where a smaller precedence means "binds stronger" as well.

JOMDoc however currently (revision 2057) does it the other way around (at least for MathML). I attached a test case which contains its own notation definitions. What JOMDoc produces is (below shown as ASCII instead of the real MathML output)

(ax) + b
a + xb

but I expect

ax + b
(a + x)b

Attachments

plustimes.omdoc Download (2.1 KB) - added by uholzer 17 months ago.
test case

Change History

Changed 17 months ago by uholzer

test case

  Changed 17 months ago by vzholudev

  • owner changed from vzholudev to dmisev
  • milestone set to Release v0.1.5

Dimitar, please take care of this ticket with a high priority. Thnks

  Changed 17 months ago by dmisev

  • cc kohlhase, clange added

Let's first check if such a change would not break something somewhere (sTeX maybe?). Michael, Christoph?

  Changed 17 months ago by clange

Michael will have to answer this ultimately. AFAIK the handling in JOMDoc and sTeX is currently the same (otherwise he would have noticed a mismatch earlier); so if we change it, both sTeX and JOMDoc would have to be fixed.

follow-up: ↓ 5   Changed 17 months ago by kohlhase

  • status changed from new to closed
  • resolution set to wontfix

I am aware of the fact that the implemented preferences are different from those of the MKM paper, but I do not consider this a problem. They are also different in that they range over all integers (I think). I am very opposed to changing the implementations of JOMDoc and sTeX, what we should rather do is (finally) make the correct specification in OMDoc1.3 that explains the whole thing.

Please do not change a running system over a simple transformation.

in reply to: ↑ 4   Changed 17 months ago by clange

Replying to kohlhase:

what we should rather do is (finally) make the correct specification in OMDoc1.3 that explains the whole thing.

Then I'd suggest that you create a ticket in the OMDoc Trac for that.

  Changed 17 months ago by kohlhase

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.