Highest Priority
================

- give examples for the new quantifier translations in regularization
  (quotient_term.ML)


Higher Priority
===============

- Ask Markus how the files Quot* should be named.
  (There is a HOL/Library/Quotient.thy --- seems to be an example. *)

- Is Bexeq the right name?


- If the constant definition gives the wrong definition
  term, one gets a cryptic message about absrep_fun

- Handle theorems that include Ball/Bex. For this, would 
  it help if we introduced separate Bex and Ball constants 
  for quotienting?

- The user should be able to give quotient_respects and 
  preserves theorems in a more natural form.


Lower Priority
==============

- accept partial equivalence relations

- think about what happens if things go wrong (like
  theorem cannot be lifted) / proper diagnostic 
  messages for the user

- inductions from the datatype package have a strange
  order of quantifiers in assumptions.

- wrapper for lifting ... to be used as an attribute

- find clean ways how to write down the "mathematical"
  procedure for a possible submission (Peter submitted 
  his work only to TPHOLs 2005...we would have to go
  maybe for the Journal of Formalised Mathematics)

- add tests for adding theorems to the various thm lists

- Maybe quotient and equiv theorems like the ones for
  [QuotList, QuotOption, QuotPair...] could be automatically
  proven?

- Examples: Finite multiset.

- The current syntax of the quotient_definition is

      "qconst :: qty"
      as "rconst"

  Is it possible to have the more Isabelle-like
  syntax
   
      qconst :: "qty"
      as "rconst"

  That means "qconst :: qty" is not read as a term, but
  as two entities.

- Add syntax for Bexeq, for example "\<exists>!!"