Re: Structural v. semantic markup

Mike Piff ([email protected])
Thu, 3 Nov 1994 09:11:38

On Wed, 2 Nov 1994 09:27:02 Nick Arnett wrote:
%>
%>Using a tag like <theorem> in a document would seem to cross the fence
%>between the two, I think, which probably isn't a good thing. What you seem
%>to be suggesting is that you'd use this tag when there's an element of a
%>document which "is a" theorem, a lexical relationship. So how would you
%>use it? Writing something like this doesn't seem like a good idea:
%>
%><theorem>Yadda, yadda, yadda</theorem>
%>
This is essentially how it is tagged in LaTeX. The conventional
output would be something like either

Theorem 2 Yadda, ...

or

Theorem 3.2 Yadda, ...

or some other variant, with Theorem in bold; however, depending on
the *definition* of <theorem>, other output is possible, eg, none,
different text for "Theorem", no number, ....

If you like, logically, this is a "Theorem", but what a "Theorem"
really is is defined elsewhere, and can vary according to the context.

%>Instead, tagging along the following lines is much richer and flexible,
%>since it can express relationships that are ambiguous or inexpressible in
%>flat or relational models.
%>
%>Yadda, yadda, yadda<LEX element="paragraph", relationship="is a",
%>content="theorem"><p>
%>

Where would "Theorem 3.2" come from?

Mike Piff
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%% Dr M J Piff, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of %%
%% Sheffield, UK. +44 114 282 4431 e-mail: [email protected] %%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%