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

Re: mathml media type registered?

From: Max Froumentin <mf@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:31:38 +0200
To: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Cc: W3C MathML Discussion <www-math@w3.org>
Message-ID: <87ptk2ckp1.fsf@w3.org>

Hi Bill,

William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu> wrote:

>> in http://www.w3.org/Math/Group/draft-spec/chapter7.html#id.7.1.3
> Since that's a password-protected URI

Oops. Sorry, 
Note that it was already in the first edition of MathML2.

> may I be so bold as to inquire here why an xhtml namespace should
> require a mimetype?  (I suppose I should have said "xml namespace",
> but, apart from electronic data interchange contexts, no other root
> namespace for small xml namespaces comes to mind.)

Because it is expected that an MathML document be transmitted over HTTP,
and looking at the content-type header to check what the document type is
is easier than actually loading the document and looking at it.

With content negociation, a server could offer to send an equation at
a given URI as PNG or MathML, or SVG, depending on the contents of the
request's Accept header.

> (Does ruby have a mimetype?)

There isn't an official mime type, as far as I'm aware, although
application/x-ruby has been suggested. 

> Is the idea that a mimetype is required for included MathML objects in
> markups like TEI?

I don't know much about TEI, but I imagine it would be like HTML, or
Docbook, where can you have inline MathML fragments with the MathML
namespace (bar DTD validation issues). In this case the namespace is
sufficient and the mime type of the compound document would be
expected to be that of the outermost language.

Hope this helps,

Received on Tuesday, 22 July 2003 17:33:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:34 UTC