From: <juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com>

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:03:59 -0800 (PST)

Message-ID: <3499.217.124.69.240.1166616239.squirrel@webmail.canonicalscience.com>

To: <www-math@w3.org>

Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2006 04:03:59 -0800 (PST)

Message-ID: <3499.217.124.69.240.1166616239.squirrel@webmail.canonicalscience.com>

To: <www-math@w3.org>

Profiling] Currently, the available group of MathML tools generates a broad spectrum of heterogeneus outputs. You can match tools from the strictly 'presentational' output part of the spectrum (often wrong from a structural or accessibility view) to high-quality parallel markup. I wait that proposal for a profile attribute can be attached to a island of MathML code was finally included in MathML 3. This profiling would let us, for instance, the automatic embedding of docs fragments from different authors into a single composed doc. Since profiling helps to identify weakness on characteristic outputs for each tool. This is not theoretical discourse, let me focus on a recent posting [1] in Distler blog: the self-proclaimed technologically more advanced blog of the planet. Distler appears to finally correct the problem with ds^2 on IteX tool, but continues generating redundant <mrows> in <mfrac>, <msup>, and other constructs (practice disacouraged for Gecko based browsers [2]). Invisible times continues being represented by justaposition. However, when one finds <mrow><mn>4</mn><mi>π</mi><mi>i</mi></mrow> one can add the two lacking <mo>&invisibleTimes;</mo>. One also can suspect that the _i_ is not a generic variable but the imaginary unit, correcting that also. Tensors are incorrect encoded using tricks instead the correct tensor structure of MathML. However, it is not difficult to notice that tensors are often encoded as template [<msup> | <msub>] [<mi>] [<mrow> [ two or more <mi>] Conversor can generate a warning alerting the information operator at least when matched that template. Other stuff is more difficult. You can find dt being encoded in two different ways –and rendering very different also!– in the same formula [1]: as <mrow><mi>d</mi><mi>t</mi></mrow> and as <mi>dt</mi>. This only can be corrected by posterior human checking I think. A full conversion cannot be automated but profiling help to semiautomatization. At least when the coversor/analizer detects a <mtext> from certain ASCIIMath sources, the probability that <mtext> was being used there as trick for forcing roman rendering of a variable is very large -specially when <mtext> is being applied to a two tokens- and let us take adequate actions correcting the source before including it in our database. Certificates] However, profiling cannot work for invalid MathML or seudo-MathML. Therein we need some kind of certification procedure that can guarantize authors that tools they are using are generating real MathML. Recently, I detected someone sent to me incorrect MathML. Investigating a bit I find that WhatWG community has simply ignored any advice from MatHML community and plans to embebed MathML (and SVG) into HTML5 [3]. Ok anyone is free to make mistakes if desires, is not? I already said everything I would say about that in the past both here and in Mozilla lists. I find very disturbing now is that stuff is not MathML is being called MathML. Now, there is a first step for embebbeding MathML into HTML 4 from Sam Ruby [3, 4]. It looks as suggestion I did here [5, 6] but no, wait, it is not the same! That I said then was a reply to the WhatWG and Mozilla’s people usuported claim that people was asking for MathML support into HTML instead XML. I suggested that if anyone was obtaining problems for publishing MathML in XHTML would publish on HTML 4 using script-DOM techniques. It was a trick for asistance not the rule for publishing maths on the next future. However, the suggestion was to render MathML (true MathML) into HTML 4, 5, or 6 if any more. A priori, the new project [3, 4] is for adding something as _reformatted_ MathML. For instance, XML empty syntax is not supported and <none/> has to be written as <none></none>. Several tools generate stuff as <mrow/>, <mtext/>... Since none (repeat none) of the hundred of current MathML tools generate full tags instead standard XML empty ones. This may be read as "none of a hundred of MathML tools is compatible with we (i.e. them) call MathML". There is also no support for the MathML entitities several tools (and legacy MathML docs at scientific databases and journals) are using. It is interesting to notice that those people continue promoting modern tools [3] being more limited that previously available ones. For example, the mature thecniques discussed on [5, 6] let you to publish true MathML (just copy and paste without changing empty tags) in HTML for both Gecko and MSIE-Mathplayer. The modern tool [3] only let you to publish previously _reformated_ MathML "At least for Gecko-based browsers". Cool! I decided to follow the MathML example [7] illustrated on [4] and I find this source <body> <math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"/> <mrow> <mi>x</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mfrac> ... </math> <body> Knowing (from experience) what kind of people is being involved in the tasks of generation of MathML code and tools and with some experience on all kind of scary stuff they are generating, including using HTML <strong> for vectors inside MathML islands, thinking that MathML is a DOM and so on, I carefully recommend the implementation of a formal certification for tools using the logo, the name MathML, or even the MathML namespace. In above case, the source is not even XML well-formed and could be easily rejected by the W3C validation service but I still think that forcing certification _is_ an issue! This way, 'enthusiatic' 'novel' approaches as that of MathML on HTML 4 [3, 4] would receive a nice "this is not MathML, period" [*] and their authors would be asked to carefully avoid any naming to MathML confounding users. We have a bunch of experience with HTML and the creepy code is being spreaded over the web. The situation with MathML arising from initiatives as WhatWG HTML5 could be a true nightmare due to the intrinsic difficulty, variability, and markup/text ratio for mathematical markup. The MathML W3C would take actions responsible for the web well-working. If no control over is being called MathML and sold as such on the web is taken by the W3C and if people from personal projects, from organizations as Mozilla or from ‘standard’ bodies as WhatWG continue calling mathML stuff is not MathML (as defined by the W3C spec and DTD/Schema), then I am sorry to say that we would valuate very much the posibility for a generic "MathML input is not supported" alert on our 2007 website, including forums [**]. If not formal reply is received to this suggestion, it is will be interpreted as negative to discussion of this possibility. References and notes] [1] http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/~distler/blog/archives/001030.html#more [2] http://www.mozilla.org/projects/mathml/authoring.html [3] http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/~distler/blog/archives/001065.html [4] http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/12/05/HOWTO-Embed-MathML-and-SVG-into-HTML4 [5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2006Oct/0102.html [6] http://canonicalscience.blogspot.com/2006/10/mathml-in-html-4-and-5-and.html [7] http://intertwingly.net/stories/2006/12/05/mathml.html4 [*] Paraphrasing here Roger B. Sidje :] [**] And I suspect that several organizations and others would follow our way. Since i kow little people interested in solving problems artificially created by others.Received on Wednesday, 20 December 2006 12:04:15 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:38 UTC
*