- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:12:40 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9887 --- Comment #14 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2010-08-19 01:12:39 --- (In reply to comment #13) > I don't understand the example. What's the actual use case? Annotation? > Wouldn't <mtext> be the way to do annotation? No. mtext is a token element that renders text as part of the expression not a (typically unrendered) structured annotation. annotation-xml (like svg's foreign-element) is a container element for arbitrary structured content (typically but not necessarily, non-mathml). HTML, being the canonical markup language for structured text is perhaps the prime example of what one might want to put in such an annotation. Certainly there can be no justification for such a simple well formed valid input document to produce such a bizarre unusable DOM tree. It isn't for the mathml spec (or its editor) to speculate on what possible uses the annotation may have, perhaps it is data used by some in-page javascript to pop up proof help tips, or perhaps it's alternative representations as openmath or content mathml, or html4. My preference would be to remove the entire mechanism to make html elements break out of foreign content, the only justification given for this (supporting possible legacy documents using a previously undefined math element in html) seems very weak, such an argument would prevent any new elements ever being added to html. failing that annotation-xml and svg's foreign-content should be protected from this so that they are usable. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 19 August 2010 01:12:41 UTC