W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > April 2002

Re: Errata on MathML (was: Re: UTC Agenda Item: Variation Selection Problem)

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 01:15:54 +0100
Message-Id: <200204030015.BAA23082@penguin.nag.co.uk>
To: duerst@w3.org
CC: www-math@w3.org, unicore@unicode.org, ion@ams.org, bnb@ams.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org, asmusf@ix.netcom.com, kenw@sybase.com

>
>Any by the way, is *anybody* minding the store over there in
>MathML? How do W3C Recommendations get published with blatant
>errors in their use of the Unicode Standard and 10646?

well errors happen and I'm sure there are errors in mathml (as I'm sure
there are in unicode), (I haven't checked the details yet, I'm on
vactation this week and just noticed this thread) but in the case of the
mathml lists they were of course in the main derived from various
Unicode submissions and proposals, we tried to keep track of what was
happening with the final submission, and given that we went to press
before Unicode 3.1 was finalised, I think the list is as accurate as can
be expected. The variation selector part was the most tentative (I for
one only saw the final VS list when the relevant report was made public
a year after mathml, I think, although I did see earlier versions of the
VS proposals). There were also late changes in long arrows for instance
that didn't make it into mml. It was always planned to issue errata to
bring things back into line with unicode once 3.2 was finalised, there
was not much point in doing anything before that.


>Same issue for the cancellations of U+2277.

>Incidentally, the MathML tables also make the nonsanctioned
>extension of all character short identifiers to 5 digits
>(defined neither by the Unicode Standard nor Clause 6.5 of
>10646-1).

I see that this comment on the number of digits was corrected later, but
in anycase it can only refer to the unicode U.... notation for refering
to a unicode character.  MathML (mainly, if not always) uses XML &#
notation and that is defined by the XML spec not by either Unicode or
10646. It would be entirely wrong to suggest that (say) &#032; is incorrect
in any way, similarly any other decimal or hex represenataion of the
number. The DTD files consistently use 5 digits and the 5 digit form is
used to generate consistent file names for the PNG files of  representative
character images in the HTML version of the spec. As far as I can see
this adds clarity to the dtd and does not contravene any relevant
specification. 

This reply only really comments on the "social" aspects of the comments
in the original message. The technical comments relating to
the mathml character assignments are however noted and we will as I
comment above be checking the DTD for various issues, Unicode 3.2
compliance being one, and issuing errata if necessary as soon as time
permits.

David


_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
Received on Tuesday, 2 April 2002 19:16:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 20 February 2010 06:12:51 GMT