W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > April 2003

Re: Content Markup or Presentation Markup for Audio Rendering of MathML

From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 23:49:30 +0200
Message-ID: <3EA70A6A.3020603@activemath.org>
To: www-math@w3.org

Bernhard Keil wrote:
>>Why do you doubt that Content Markup
>>is reach enough?
>>Wasn't it created to struture the meaning of the mathematical expressions?
>   MathML Content Markup covers only a small little subset of
>   Mathematics , Physics, Medical Mathemathics, ... and s.o.
>   It might be good enough to cover shool mathematics.

That's the whole bone of difference between OpenMath and MathML-content:
-> the core symbol set is hooked in MathML specification, actually a 
reason for the huge DTD, it indeed covers only a small math education. 
The one of OpenMath core is much more comfortable, I feel.
-> the extensibility is possible in both cases. In MathML you specify a 
URI. In OpenMath you specify a content-dictionary and a name... the only 
difference: in OpenMath you have something to read about this content 
whereas behind the URI in MathML is... well, that's not specified!

Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2003 17:58:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:33 UTC