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

Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 12:01:43 -0500

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <i7hcvn985k.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 12:01:43 -0500

To: www-math@w3.org

Message-ID: <i7hcvn985k.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

<juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com> writes: > In the first version of the input syntax for MathML i discussed here, > stuff as entitities was represented as empty elements. Not just for MathML > but also for XHTML. E.g. ó was <oacute/> and next defined via > Schema (no DTD). I don't see oacute as a math symbol; it's just another letter. If it's used in one's locale, why not just use it as it is. If it's not used in one's locale, it might be convenient to have <ocaute/> in one's author-level documenttype, but I don't see it as other than cdata for a browser-level documenttype. > In a visual representation, you just copy tokens and the times is mainly > redundant. But it is not for aural rendering. "4 times pi" is standard in > spoken mathematics. [4 * pi] is better than [4 pi]. In my experience one usually says "4 pi" rather than "4 times pi". Are you saying that mathml-capable aural user agents commonly do not make a distinction between <mi>x</mi><mi>y</mi> and <mi>xy</mi> ? Perhaps a lame aural agent might fail in this regard. But, on the other side, a lame visual agent might also fail by inserting an unknown symbol indicator for <mo>&invisibleTimes;</mo>. (There is a history of this.) > Also the invisible times can be useful for automatic linebreaking. But doesn't it bind rather tightly? Inside an mrow wouldn't a + operator usually be a better place to break? As an author if I think the context for using <mi>x</mi><mi>y</mi> might not be sufficient to imply invisibleTimes, then I will use something explicit like \cdot. -- BillReceived on Friday, 22 December 2006 17:02:16 UTC

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