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

Re: Samples from the Internet

From: <juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 03:09:34 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3324.>
To: <www-math@w3.org>
Cc: <davidc@nag.co.uk>

David Carlisle said:
> I wrote
>> <m:apply> <m:mo>&gg;</m:mo>
>> is not valid, as can easiy be confirmed with a validating xml parser.
> which was, depending on how charitable you are feeling, either incorrect
> or not as accurate as it could be...
> It's clearly not allowed by the prose description of apply, but the DTD
> is rather more permissive by default (for compatibility with the mathml1
> dtd, the reasons for the original mathml dtd being permisive are not
> really clear, but remember mathml was largely developed in at a time
> while XML was being developed (I wasn't on the WG at that time) and they
> probably wanted to keep the dtd fairly simple.
> Anyway in my defence, I usually use the DTD with
> "/cygwin/home/w3ccvs/WWW/Math/DTD/mathml2/mathml2.dtd"
> [
> <!ENTITY % MathMLstrict "INCLUDE">
> ]>
> <apply>
> <mo/>
> <ci/>
> </apply>
> with MathMLstrict parsing enabled, an mo in an apply does generate a
> validation error as you would expect.
>  rxp -sxV mml.xml
> Warning: Content model for apply does not allow element mo here
>  in unnamed entity at line 6 char 4 of file:///c:/tmp/mml.xml
> Sorry about the misinformation earlier.
> I think that we should probably make things default to the mathml strict
> content models in mathml3, but that's a WG decision to be taken at some
> future time.
> David

Just by curiosity. There exists another online validator (from a famous
CAS) that approves

<math xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML'>
 <mo>&gg;</mo>  <!-- put entity for the operator here -->

as valid MathML.
Received on Monday, 27 November 2006 11:13:08 UTC

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