Re: menclose

There is some precedence in the entity names of using "upwards",
"downwards", "horizontal", and "vertical" for arrows and lines.  For
corners, there is upperleft, upperright, lowerleft, and lowerright.  Of
course, this doesn't mean that attribute values need to or should follow the
precedent of entity names.   However, I'll throw these out as a possible
alternative:

upwardsstrike
downwardsstrike
horizontalstrike
verticalstrike
upperleft
upperright
lowerleft
lowerright

Another precedent:  currently, all attribute names use only lower case
letters.

Neil Soiffer                     email: neils@dessci.com
Senior Scientist                 phone: 562-433-0685
Design Science, Inc.             http://www.dessci.com
"How Science Communicates"
MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, Equation Editor, TeXaide

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jpederse@wiley.com>
To: "Robert Miner" <RobertM@dessci.com>
Cc: <www-math@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: menclose


>
>
> Hi Robert,
>
> Looks good to me!  Except for box and circle, we could be consistent with
> the directions and use
>
> NESWstrike
> NWSEstrike
> WEstrike
> NEcorner
> SEcorner
> SWcorner
> NWcorner
>
> John.
>
>
>
>
>
>                       Robert Miner
>                       <RobertM@dessci.c        To:
jpederse@wiley.com
>                       om>                      cc:       www-math@w3.org
>                                                Subject:  menclose
>                       08/06/03 06:14 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> I'm trying to nail down a list of candidates for new menclose values.
> Does this sound right?
>
> NE/SW strikeout
> NW/SE strikeout
> horizontal strikeout
> box
> circle
>
> Actuarial notation is one of the current values, but it is only
> one of the four possible "corners" of a box.  MathType does all four,
> so I would be for adding
>
> NE corner
> SE corner
> SW corner
> NW corner
>
> as well.  Obviously "NE corner" duplicates "actuarial" but if I let
> little things like that start bothering me, it is definitely time to
> get out of the MathML biz :-).
>
> Anyway, if this is the list, we can start trying to come up with some
> names.
>
> --Robert
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dr. Robert Miner                                RobertM@dessci.com
> MathML 2.0 Specification Co-editor                    651-223-2883
> Design Science, Inc.   "How Science Communicates"   www.dessci.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 7 August 2003 01:05:41 UTC