PS: A124184: prime factorization of 1?

[Leroy Quet]

Zak Seidov wrote:
>
>>Dear seqfans,
>>
>>In A124184,
>>shouldn't we omit 1 
>>(I omit it, while Leroy includes)?
>>
>>What is prime factorization of 1?
>>...
>

I wrote:

>I SHOULD have included a comment that the 1 case is controversial. 
>Someone might argue that, since 1 has no prime factors and therefore 
>hasn't any (positive) prime-factorization exponents, then none of 1's 
>prime-factorization exponents divide 1.
>;)
>(And so, technically, 1 meets the definition of the sequence....sort of..)
>
>
>So I included the 1 in the event someone searching for this sequence on 
>the OEIS includes a 1 at the beginning of the sequence they are searching 
>for.

Also it occurs to me that I don't say in the sequence's definition that 
only the prime-factorization exponents that are positive (ie nonzero) are 
to be considered.
Now 0 doesn't divide any positive integer, so the terms > 1 are not 
affected by considering the 0 exponents. But all of 1's 
prime-factorization exponents are 0, and 0 does not divide 1. So I think 
it is best to include 1 in the sequence.

Thanks,
Leroy Quet