Re: Neumaier-Pryce proposed decoration system (v03.2)
John Pryce wrote:
Herewith, as a position paper, is the current version of the Neumaier-Pryce proposed decoration system, §4.8 of the current draft standard text v03.2.
Some minor corrections:
p.26/line -8: ein missing
/line -7: bnd missing
p.23/bottom: Formula (14) is not fully correct - since if \x has some
empty component, but not all, it yields neither (16) nor the suggested
aternative.
The correct definition is:
If {\em some} component of $\~x$ is empty:
\name{domain}(\~x) &= (\emp_{\Temp},\ldots,\emp_{\Temp}),
\name{domain}(\~x_d) &= (\emp_{e_1},\ldots,\emp_{e_n}),
where
e_i = \left\{
\begin{array}{cp{.5\TW}}
\Till & if $\~d_i=\Till$, \\
\Temp & otherwise. \\
\end{array}
\right.
and otherwise
\name{domain}(\~x)=\~x_e,
\name{domain}(\~x_d)=\~x_e,
where
e_i = \left\{
\begin{array}{cp{.5\TW}}
\Tsaf & if $\~x_i$ is unbounded, \\
\Tbnd & if $\~x_i$ is bounded. \\
\end{array}
\right.
end.