From: Mark P. Line <mark@polymathix.com>

Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:13:30 -0500 (CDT)

Message-ID: <4980.69.91.14.68.1153145610.squirrel@webmail2.pair.com>

To: www-math@w3.org

Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 09:13:30 -0500 (CDT)

Message-ID: <4980.69.91.14.68.1153145610.squirrel@webmail2.pair.com>

To: www-math@w3.org

juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com wrote: > > Mark P. Line wrote: > >> So you want it to be both improved and replaced? How is that a >> cost-effective strategy? > > Well, the most important feature of standards is that standards may work. > Standard can be both improved and replaced. Improved when changes are > minimal and changed when a new paradigm holds. But not at the same time. You said that your suggestions here are intended to do both, so I assume you're trying to do both at the same time. I still don't see how that can be cost-effective. I've been waiting for 30 years for a "new paradigm" to cause SQL to become obsolete. It hasn't happened, I'm not holding my breath, and I continue to use SQL for what it's best practice for. I don't think it's reasonable to expect MathML to become obsolete in any plannable timeframe, and it happens to be best practice for what I need it for. For those of us with mere practical concerns about getting new solutions into the hands of users, there comes a time when you have to pick a platform and run with it. > Any case, as "strategy" I am saying is no different from seeing D. > Carlisle improving TeX-systems with the future LaTeX3, whereas he try to > replacing TeX on the web by MathML. One day Carlisle can offer us a talk > about feature sof LaTeX3 and other day he can give another on why > mathematicians would move from LaTeX to MathML for online math, ok? How is that analogous to wanting to both improve and replace MathML? It sounds like he's talking about improvements to LaTeX on one day and about applications for which a language other than LaTeX is now (or soon will be) best practice on another day. That's quite distinct from talking about improvements to MathML on one day and talking about replacing MathML on the same day. That's why I wanted to know if you'd rather improve MathML or replace it. > The other day, I resumed some changes and improvements to MathML from > memory. I forget to cite the trouble with decimal sign. Somewhat as > content MathML does not asume a special presentational way to tan > -rendered as tan or tg (France)- content MathML would not asume > presentational stuff for something like 3.1416, rendered as 3.1416 or > 3,1416 (Spain). What's the improvement you're suggesting for representing real numbers in content MathML? I hope you're not hoping for localizability. If you are, I'm going to push for localizable Python: fuer n in ['eins','zwei','drei']: wenn n.faengtanmit('e'): drucke n andernfalls: drucke "Zahlwort faengt nicht mit 'e' an!" -- Mark Mark P. Line Polymathix San Antonio, TXReceived on Monday, 17 July 2006 14:13:44 UTC

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