From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:48:03 -0400

To: public-html@w3.org, www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <i7abkg56z0.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 15:48:03 -0400

To: public-html@w3.org, www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <i7abkg56z0.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> writes: >> > For example, it seems like this: >> > >> > <math> 3 + n = 6 </math> >> >> as in the March 1995 draft of HTML 3.0 ?? > > No, not at all. The idea would be that the parser would automatically > infer the tag names and so the DOM would look exactly like it would for > this markup: > > <math> <mrow><mn>3 </mn><mo>= </mo><mi>n </mi><mo>= </mo><mn>6 </mn></row></math> > > This is the same way that the following two HTML4 snippets are exactly > equivalent and generate the same underlying DOM: > <p><table><tr><td></table> > <p><p><table><tbody><tr><td></td><tr></tbody></table> > The "tbody" isn't in the original markup, but it's still in the DOM. Yes, thanks to the doc type definition of HTML4. But there's no analogous automatic content model for the math. More to the point -- and the reason for my allusion to March 1995 -- is this: How will you persuade browser authors to provide this non-trivial service? It looks like sand-bagging to me. -- BillReceived on Sunday, 30 March 2008 19:48:43 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Monday, 29 September 2014 09:38:53 UTC
*