W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > October 2004

Re: newbie MathML question

From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 10:48:20 -0400
To: W3C MathML Discussion <www-math@w3.org>
Message-ID: <i7u0su90sr.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

Justin Garofoli <justin.garofoli@gmail.com> writes:

> Sorry if I'm being dense, but I haven't been able to find this stuff
> very easily on either the mathml or the xthml website.  The main
> examples given aren't valid xhtml (with the w3 validator), so I dug
> deeper.  The best that I could do is xhtml1.1 plus mathml, and of
> course css.  However, tools that I considered essential for authorship
> (the w3 standard documents for html/xhtml and css) don't clearly add
> up with xhtml1.1.  The 1.1 documents don't follow the same format as
> the older ones (which I had found particularly easy to use).  Perhaps
> I am missing something, or asking too much of you.  I guess the
> simplest answer to my question would be one that answers the question
> of where a dtd for xhtml1.0 (strict or transitonal) plus mathml is. 
> Or, what would I be best advised to do if I want valid xhtml with
> mathml?

See http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/support/gellmu/doc/userdoc-ht.xml
for an example that does validate through validator.w3.org  Note that
with XML a DOCTYPE declaration must have a system identifier, and I
believe that http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtml-math11-f.dtd
(a single file -- date 2003/11/04) is current.

                                    -- Bill
Received on Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:48:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 23:39:49 UTC