W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > May 2000

Re: Reservations about <mchar>

From: William F. Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2000 09:05:45 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200005031305.JAA21926@hilbert.math.albany.edu>
To: davidc@nag.co.uk, rbs@maths.uq.edu.au
Cc: www-math@w3.org
David writes:

> Thus a fragment
> <mrow><mi>A</mi><mo>&rightarrow;</mo><mi>B</mi></mrow>
> is not well formed XML.

This particular instance is extremely provocative because my concept
of "rightarrow" does not view it as PCDATA in any way for the *content*
side.  (I guess that it's OK for presentation.)

IMHO the nearest XML (or SGML) way to model it is as "<rightarrow/>",
and then probably one can omit the "mo" container for it.

There are many other things that I would also bring up as empties.
However, I certainly would not try to do so with all of the unicode
things.  In particular, the use of empties is not a substitute for
"mchar", which is still needed as new symbols are coined.

I don't think that it is a good idea to let design be held up with
these particular fears about cpu load.  (Just think about how this
cpu issue would have been assessed in 1990.)

                                    -- Bill
Received on Wednesday, 3 May 2000 09:06:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:30 UTC