- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:43:34 GMT
- To: mf@w3.org
- Cc: Stephan.Semirat@ac-grenoble.fr, Vincent.Quint@inria.fr, www-math@w3.org
is (in my opinion) acceptable. So maybe the rule should be flexible and could depend on the operators between the subelements. The current rule allows the author to unambiguously specify whether you want the two groups of parens in (x)=(y) to be sized separately based on the size of x and y, or whether you want all four parens to be equal sized, based on the largest part of the subexpression. For the first case use (omitting all tagging except mrow) <mrow>(x)</mrow>=<mrow>(y)</mrow> for the second case use <mrow>(x)=(y)</mrow> with, ideally, some extra grouping as well, eg that last one should probably be <mrow>(<mrow>x</mrow>)</mrow>=<mrow>(<mrow>y</mrow>)</mrow> Although the inner mrows are for other purpses, they don't affect the size of the parentheses which is the issue here. > Or rather that the spec does not specify the best rendering in this > case. As others have pointed out, the spec does specify the rendering to use here (it doesn't say whether that is best or not, but that is another matter:-) David ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 30 January 2004 08:35:03 UTC