Re: SGML style display list specification
Subject: Re: SGML style display list specification
From: Ron Whitney <RFW@MATH.AMS.ORG>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:30:58 -0400 (EDT)
From email@example.com Sun Aug 11 21: 31:33 1996
Having examined the display-list specification which Robert posted
last week, I can venture a few broad comments.
My concern is in the relation between our display-list format and the
ISO 12083 math DTD developed a couple of years ago (a copy of which
was recently posted at http://www.ams.org/html-math/erb/iso12083.html).
It isn't clear to me that 12083 had any influence on the display language
posted here last week, although Robert had said:
> ... Since they all attempt to do the same thing, it is no surprise
> this proposal looks a fair amount like ISO 12083, ...
I would like to see much closer alignment between these two SGML
descriptions than exists at the moment. E.g. with notations which
differ somewhat arbitrarily (say, with "pre" superscipts), I don't see
a reason to "roll our own". Our display-list language seems more
concrete than I think we want it to be (e.g. I think it's unnecessary
for our language to allow specification of the "script size"
[attribute sizemultiple] -- or is there an example where making a
close specification of this size is crucial? This is a question
beyond simple style.).
I could continue with a host of these smallish comments, but would
like others to examine the two SGML markup sets and comment on whether
they see the thrust of the two differing as I do (and then indicate
which language is closer to what we want). I'll provide more detail
if people would like it.