- From: Christoph Lange <ch.lange@jacobs-university.de>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:24:03 +0100
- To: "Robert Miner" <robertm@dessci.com>
- Cc: leathrum@jsu.edu, www-math@w3.org
[Sorry, used a wrong "From" address, trying again] Hi Robert, On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Robert Miner <robertm@dessci.com> wrote: > Seems like the implication of this discussion is that we should try harder to make it clear in the spec that the default renderings are sample renderings, and that doing a really good job of presentation requires something like the picture outlined above. Of course I'm pleased to hear that, as this is also in line with our opinions on mathematical notation. In fact we're using the same arguments about cultural differences for justifying why people need our tools for adaptive rendering :-) I agree with you that the renderings in the spec should consistently be called "sample renderings" (or "suggested renderings") instead of "default renderings". Then, to point out that they are just examples, you could also mention alternatives in some cases where there are widely used or otherwise well-known alternatives renderings. Cheers, Christoph -- Christoph Lange, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Langec, ICQ# 51191833
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2009 18:24:39 UTC