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

Re: mover vs latin chars with diacriticals

From: <juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 03:47:49 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3408.217.124.88.134.1146826069.squirrel@webmail.canonicalscience.com>
To: <www-math@w3.org>


> David Carlisle wrote:
>
>> Regarding DSSSL, well I am using (in some sense) it when use XSL.
>> XSL is a "subset" of DSSSL
>
> Not at all. they have different syntaxes, different processing models
> and different functionality.

Please, note I really said before replying.

The parenthesized modifier "in some sense" and my precise writing of
_"subset"_ instead just _subset_ are two important points when reading.
Once clarified I said *not* that XSL was a full subset of DSSSL, I can add
some quotes on the close relationship between both you apparently do not
know

[http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/WhatIsXSL.html]

<blockquote>
XSL draws on DSSSL and the DSSSL-O work and continues the trend towards a
Web-oriented style sheet language by integrating experience with CSS.
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
    DSSSL has capabilities that XSL does not, and continues in use in the
print publishing industry. Experience with XSL might be used in a
future revision of DSSSL, but it is too early to say.
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
The XSL Submission has two classes of output: DSSSL-style flow objects and
HTML tags.
</blockquote>

[http://www.javacommerce.com/displaypage.jsp?name=xsl.sql&id=18238]

<blockquote>
XSL has DSSSL semantics without DSSSL syntax
</blockquote>

[http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xsl-20001121/slice1.html]

<blockquote>
XSL builds on the prior work on Cascading Style Sheets [CSS2] and the
Document Style Semantics and Specification Language [DSSSL].
</blockquote>

<blockquote>
The design of the formatting objects and properties extensions was first
inspired by DSSSL. The actual extensions, however, do not always look like
the DSSSL constructs on which they were based. To either conform more
closely with the CSS2 specification or to handle cases more simply than in
DSSSL, some extensions have diverged from DSSSL.
</blockquote>

>>  and next version of DSSSL will be fully a superset of XSL.
>
> Have you ever looked at DSSSL? (it's one of the few ISO standards that
> you _can_ look at without paying money).

Sharon Adler, editor of the DSSSL standard and a co-author of XSL, said
that the DSSSL committee will work to develop revisions to DSSSL that keep
it a compatible superset of XSL -this matches I said-. At least three
kinds of additions to DSSSL already were identified:

- An alternative syntax compatible with the XSL syntax;

- Extensions to the flow object tree construction language to support the
features of XSL not in DSSSL; these features would be available both with
the current syntax and the alternative syntax;

- New flow object classes and characteristics to support formatting
functionality necessary for the Web.

>> Assuming this true (I did not check), two may be prefered over
>> "infinite".
>
> you only get infinite ways in mathml by including arbitrary redundant
> mrow nesting and similar redundant features. If you going to do that for
> mathml you may as well count including arbitrary numbers of zero width
> spaces in a plain text Unicode encoding. It's about as relevant.
>
> David

infinite \neq "infinite"

Let me remark again I just copied the MathML code generated by tools and
pasted here. I may count nothing except different ways to encode q-dot or
c-dot on MathML, the different (including incorrect ones) visual
renderings of the code, the times that Mathematica 5.2 online offers error
when MathML code generated by others applications is typed in... That is
all I may count in this thread.

Regarding your comment on arbitrary numbers of zero width space, I just
can remember you that XHTML strict is often claimed to be our last hope
for clean and precise code on the Internet. MathML -not Unicode- may kill
that hope. Samples I am providing are illustrative. They are not strange
MathML codes obtained from obscure tools nobody knows. I am extracting
them from official bodies, popular communities, academic journals, and
others.

Moreover, instead irrelevant discussion about DSSSL and other outer
topics, would not be better focus on important points of the MathML
subject is being discussed here and now? E.g. what about explicit question
on  I asked in previous message but you are not replying?


Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)
Received on Friday, 5 May 2006 10:48:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 20 February 2010 06:12:58 GMT