From: Bill Naylor <bill@scl.csd.uwo.ca>

Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 15:50:13 -0400 (EDT)

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205311500230.1401-100000@iridium.scl.csd.uwo.ca>

Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 15:50:13 -0400 (EDT)

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0205311500230.1401-100000@iridium.scl.csd.uwo.ca>

Hi, we have been looking through chapter 5 of the MathML Specification and have come up with some bug reports, typos, general comments: 1) In section 5.2.1, ascending factorial notation example. It is stated: "This content expression would render using the given notation as: \frac{1^{\bar{n}}}{1^{\frac{}{n-1}}}" this should be: "This content expression would render using the given notation as: n \equiv \frac{1^{\bar{n}}}{1^{\frac{}{n-1}}}" 2) section 5.2.2 paragraph 1: "Conversely, when mixed markup appears in a content expression, it should be possible to simply and sensibly assign a semantic interpretation to the expression as whole." should be: "Conversely, when mixed markup appears in a content expression, it should be possible to simply and sensibly assign a semantic interpretation to the expression as a whole." 3) section 5.3.2 paragraph 1: "...identification of a sub-expression in one branch of semantics element gives no..." should be: "...identification of a sub-expression in one branch of a semantics element gives no..." 4) section 5.3.4 2nd to last paragraph: "...which in this case use XPointer [XPointer] to refer to an ids within the current document." should be: "...which in this case use XPointer [XPointer] to refer to ids within the current document." 5) In section 5.4.3 we are unhappy with the first example. As it stands, the 'clearly written' example will be transformed to markup which is not valid relative to the MathML dtd. Though apparently valid according to the discussion in section 5.2.4. (!?) There are two places in the replacement text where '<mi>X</mi>' occurs: <semantics> <apply> <factorial/> <mi>X</mi> <!-- HERE --> </apply> <annotation-xml encoding="MathML-Presentation"> <msup> <mn>1</mn> <mover accent="true"> <mi>X</mi> <!-- AND HERE --> <mo>‾</mo> </mover> </msup> </annotation-xml> </semantics> shouldn't the first occurrence be a X instead? whilst the second occurence must imply that some separate content->presentation stylesheet processing is present. Bill Naylor, Luca Padovani --Received on Friday, 31 May 2002 15:51:00 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:32 UTC
*