# small samples

• To: w3c-math-erb@w3.org
• Subject: small samples
• From: Ron Whitney <RFW@MATH.AMS.ORG>
• Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 16:26:07 -0400 (EDT)
• From w3c-math-erb-request@www10.w3.org Fri Aug 16 16: 26:45 1996
• Mail-system-version: <MultiNet-MM(369)+TOPSLIB(158)+PMDF(5.0)@MATH.AMS.ORG>
• Message-id: <840227167.455790.RFW@MATH.AMS.ORG>

---------------------------------------------------------
Item 8 / accents

TeX:			\tilde s, \widetilde {s+t}
Wolfram:		s^^&tilde;, {s+t}^^&tilde;
MINSE:
Display-List (S):	<moverscript>s<mc>&tilde;</moverscript>,
<moverscript>s+t<mc>&tilde;</moverscript>
Display-List (MS):
ISO 12083:		s<top>&tilde;</top>,
<subform>s+t</subform><top>&tilde;</top>

Notes:
1. Two of the fields are left blank because I'm uncertain as to how
accents will (or might) be specified in these situations. I know Rob
and Neil added an "<maccent>" element to their display-list
specification. In the case of MINSE, I'm also uncertain of the
underlying display language used to render a diacritic.

2. My reading of the ISO 12083 DTD hasn't uncovered a means of
specifying whether the tilde sizes to the width of an embellished
subformula. I think we also have yet to specify how this is done
with the Wolfram notation.

3. Would it be possible in the Wolfram approach to define a unary
prefix operator, say "\ttrans", so that "\ttrans s" and "\ttrans{s+t}"
effectively place tildes over the following arguments? I ask this
since I'm thinking the situation is similar to the case of font
changes which Neil and I have discussed, and it appeared that it would
be problematic to parse "\ttrans +" as a binary infix operator similar
to "+" itself. I'm guessing for now that one would have to use
"<mo>\ttrans +</mo>" to get it right (also adding appropriate
information about the precedence level of the new operator). But
I assume "+^^&tilde;" would parse as a binary infix operator.

4. Dave, how do you envision accents being handled?



Follow-Ups: