Re: Rendering primes: <msup><mi>x</mi><mo>&#x2032;</mo></msup>

From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:41:48 -0400

Message-ID: <i78wwmdatv.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>

Karl Tomlinson <moznews@karlt.net> writes in dev-tech-mathml chez mozilla:

>> http://www.w3.org/Math/testsuite/mml2-testsuite/Topics/Primes/primes1.xml
>> and compare the first x-prime to its sample rendering.)

Yes, with FF2 there were issues in the test suite.  Of course, when I say
"with FF2" I really mean "with FF2 and the fonts I have had".  The font
installation may be part of the problem.

> I'm not yet clear on the best solution though.

I don't see how you could be clear on it.  I think the MathML spec
needs to give it more explicit attention.

Issues include:

0.  legacy MathML content including, in particular, the past history
of the handling of U-2032 compared to the handling of U-2033 ---
see bugzilla 140439

1.  the need for providing at the level of markup (perhaps with a new
attribute), rather than cdata, for symbols analogous to
(ams)LaTeX's \prime and \backprime, which are needed for complex
scripting situations that require explicit script placement

2.  specification for handling of all the various prime-like
characters in mtext, mi, and mo

If I've stated this as I intend to, then it should follow that there
will, in any given situation, be a way for an author to override
defaults on the question of whether a prime-like character is to be
scripted automatically or to be placed explicitly.

-- Bill

Received on Monday, 30 June 2008 18:43:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:40 UTC