inf-sub vs mid-rad and Motion 16
Svetoslav Markov wrote:
> My vote would be yes if:
> 1) no different conditions are imposed on inf-sup and mid-rad ;
Can't do, unless we revise our basic assumptions and drop support for
semibounded inf-sup intervals.
Let's face it: inf-sup and mid-rad have different application domains
and different properties. There *is* a large common ground, namely
reasonably narrow intervals (neither too wide, which only inf-sup handles
well, nor too narrow, which only mid-rad can represent). I'm thinking of
basic formats here, not the various triplex forms that can do more.
Motion 16 presents the issue in a manner that permits exploitation of
that common ground, as INTLAB seems to be doing rather nicely.
Michel.
---Sent: 2010-06-27 15:09:41 UTC