Re: mid-rad, inf-sup, a caution...

[Arnold Neumaier <Arnold.Neumaier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nate Hayes wrote:
> > - Who will benefit? Who wants to exchange interval data between
> >  systems, based on mid-rad formats?
>
> Has anyone in this forum ever worked with a mechanical engineer or
> architect, or seen the computer software tools they use? In those
> applications and domains, tolerancing of parts is almost always done in
> mid-rad, e.g.,
>    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7f5cjspuAs&feature=related
> we should be so lucky that some of the largest and most successful software
> companies in the world, such as Autodesk, Dassault Systems, Parametric
> Technology, etc. would some day use our P1788 standard. Having at least an
> interchange format for mid-rad with standardized conversion rules I suspect
> would be a minimal requirement.

Section 5.2 of the Vienna proposal discusses conversion of intervals to 
midrad format, and Section 6.8 to midrad text output. The opposite
conversion direction is discussed only in Section 6.3 (midrad text to
interval).

But I see now that the proposal forgot to add in Section 2.5 a
constructor that takes two floats x,r, and creates the tightest interval
containing x+-r.

This is enough to interface to the engineering world.


Arnold Neumaier