Paul,
One chief reason why it looks right that, in my notation, I retain the
full x,y in eg. N(x,y,t_j) instead of using only x is that on occasions I
replace x and y with specific prescribed values. It is has become an issue
as to how much emphasis I should place on consistency of style; I feel I
oughtn't say N(x,t_J) one moment and N(1,a(J),t_J) the next, when 1 and
a(J)
obviously replace the x and the merely implicit y.
This has become a broader issue because when I define my value z as
(1/2)y
I then can, more justifiably, deploy only a z and not a full 1,y
reference.
But then some of my references, as a matter of consistency (in view of how
I
have originally defined the set or function, eg. as N(x,y,t), I make the
1,z
reference while in other, simultaneous references to sets defined after I
had defined z, I use only the z, but the reference is to exactly the same
interval. It looks awkward.
Am I making a fuss over nothing?
With thanks.
|
