Re: an extension of the mizar language for dealing with article metadata

Piotr Rudnicki <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.mathematics.mizar
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi,

I suggest, following Jesse's suggestion that the entire .bib files for
Mizar articles be incorporated into the .miz files.

Cheers, PR

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 01:12:34PM -0800, Jesse Alama wrote:
> As it stands now, the title of an article, its author(s), and the name
> of sections aren't actually a formal part of a mizar text: we
> customarily include this information as comments
> 
>   :: Introduction to XYZ Theory
>   ::
>   :: by Joe the MIZAR Writer
> 
>   environ
> 
>   ...
> 
>   begin :: Preliminaries
> 
>   ...
> 
>   begin :: Main Lemma
> 
>   ...
> 
>   begin :: Main Theorem
> 
>   ...
> 
> I propose to put this information into the body of the article, to move
> it from comments to non-comments.  Perhaps we could introduce new
> keywords like `title', `author', and `section'.  Then, articles could
> look like
> 
>  title{Introduction to XYZ Theory}
>  author{Joe the MIZAR Writer}
> 
>  environ
> 
>    <stuff>
> 
>  begin{Preliminaries}
> 
>  definition ...
> 
>  theorem ...
> 
>  theorem ...
> 
>  begin{Main Lemma}
> 
>  definition ...
> 
>  begin{Main Theorem}
> 
>  theorem ...
> 
> This would make the sections and article title part of the text; as it
> stands, these features are not represented in the mizar grammar (because
> customarily they are tucked away within comments).
> 
> The primary motivation for this idea is to help improve Josef Urban's
> semantic MML presentation.  Currently he has to do some hacking to
> extract metadata like article titles and authors; extracting section
> information (currently unsupported) would be similarly complicated.  The
> problem is that the article metadata isn't represented in the XML
> representation of an article; it has to be inferred from the original
> mizar source.
> 
> Additionally, this new syntax might help to simplify processing of FM
> articles: with this approach one wouldn't need the BibTeX fields
> SECTION1, SECTION2, etc., because these could be inferred from the
> article.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Jesse
> 
> -- 
> Jesse Alama ([email protected])

-- 
Piotr Rudnicki                                http://web.cs.ualberta.ca/~piotr
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.