W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > March 2006

Re: Mathematical selection

From: Richard Kaye <R.W.Kaye@bham.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:04:01 +0100
To: Public MathML mailing list <www-math@w3.org>
Message-Id: <200603301204.01961.R.W.Kaye@bham.ac.uk>

Do inferred mrow's cause problems?  (All 
considered, I am not sure this feature is a good 
thing...) I can think of cases when you want to 
select the (inferred) mrow but in fact get the 
whole thing including the <math> tag
and display="block" and goodness knows what
else.  Then naive pasting it into another document 
may not do what you want.


On Thursday 30 March 2006 11:46, Paul Libbrecht wrote:
> Michael Kohlhase wrote:
> > we have already talked about this, and I would like to publically
> > re-state my opinion that only approach #2 can really work.
> Do you have pointers about this ?
> At least I don't think there's anyone implementing it... do I mistake ?
> If not... my +1 to put this in a revised spec (or a note?) as this is
> the only way to avoid trying to have scripts replace the work of
> selection and copy.
> > Of course, you will only realistically get parallel markup, if you
> > generate it from content-oriented methods anyway :-).
> The bone question is whether level 1 is still sensible... I sort of
> believe that if this is implemented, authors (and gui-editors) will put
> more brackets mrows... otherwise, we can,
> Can producers of plain MathML-presentation speak about it ?
> Are there situations where such a sub-term selection would be worse than
> the text selection?
> thanks
> paul
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2006 11:07:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:37 UTC