[carstimon]

The great thing is we're not constraining our notation. As reikonomusha said, the standard notation is easier to read. Other notation is better for programming or certain things, and that's what we use there.

Re: your last paragraph. I only went to the end because I knew that there must have been a good example in the questions. If you want I can give you examples from the middle of a talk.

[lisper]

> the standard notation is easier to read

Only because you're used to it. In fact, standard notation is much harder to read because it's ambiguous, often to the point of actively introducing errors. See:

http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/s...

> If you want I can give you examples

No, I don't dispute that blackboards are useful. What I dispute is that their utility is so high that we ought to design mathematical notation around their limitations.

[carstimon]

Ok, I can agree that we shouldn't design notation around their limitations. And I do like what they do in SICM. But, I'm just trying to root for the point up-thread:

>It seems tempting to have a single unambiguous notation for mathematics. But In constructing such a language, one will quickly realize that doing mathematics becomes an intensely arduous task.

When talking about math, our notation doesn't have to be precise, and that's ok.

> No, I don't dispute that blackboards are useful. Just obsolete :P