Also I asked for concrete examples of $|x>$ and $\phi>$ but was given none. I think the reason is that it is not easy express these quantities in concrete terms in the Physics picture. What I was really trying to do was relate the physicists notation to the mathematicians notation. Obviously there has to be a one-to-one correspondence between the way physicists and mathematicians deal with the same space.
Below I identify this one-to-one correspondence. So please look away if it might confuse you. This is only for physicists who might be interested in how mathematicians would view the same Hilbert space.
In pure mathematics the equivalent of $|\phi>$ is essentially just the function $\phi$. In pure mathematics, the function $\phi$ is considered to be the vector in the Hilbert space.
In pure mathematics the equivalent to $<\phi|$ is the element of the dual space which equals the map $\Phi$ defined by:
$\Phi(\cdot ):(\cdot ) \mapsto (\phi,.)$
where $(\phi,\psi):=\int dx\phi^{*}(x)\psi(x)$ is the inner product of pure mathematics.
Also, in then mathematics view, $<x|$ and $|x>$ are essentially equivalent to the functionals:
$<x|$ $:\phi \mapsto \phi(x)$
$|x>$ $:\Phi \mapsto \phi(x)^{*}$
So as for a concrete example. If $\phi(x)=Ae^{2\pi i(x)}$ were a wave function
$|\phi>$ would in mathematics simply be the function $\phi(\cdot )=Ae^{2\pi i(\cdot )}$ which is a vector in a Hilbert space
and $<y|$ would be the functional that maps $\phi()=Ae^{2\pi i()}$ to the real number $r=Ae^{2\pi i(y)}$
Thus, in the mathematicians way of looking at this Hilbert space, it is easy to write down in concrete terms what the vectors of the space are.
When $<x|$ and $|y>$ act on each other, they behave as a different sort of function and produce $\delta(x-y)$. This reminds me a bit of function overloading in computing.
It is all a pretty clever way of working so that:
$\left \langle \phi|\psi \right \rangle=\int dx<\phi|x><x|\psi>=\int dx\phi(x)^{*}\psi(x)=:\left ( \phi,\psi \right )$
So, using the bra and ket vectors in this way you end up with precisely the inner product $\left ( \phi,\psi \right )$ of pure mathematics.
And what I have described is effectively the ono-to-one correspondence between the Physics way of looking at it, and the Mathematics way of looking at it. Physicists use the former and mathematicians use the latter; except mathematicians don't bother with the $<x|$ or $|x>$ vectors.
I just wrote this because I think it is always good to be able to look at a problem in a different way. Or at least to be aware that there are other representations of the same thing. Physicists and mathematicians could probably benefit from each others work.