From: Neil Soiffer <neil.soiffer@gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:55:55 -0700

Message-ID: <AANLkTimf-vfPdjl8MzXP2Kjf9NA2-aFPb4u1fYvRy21v@mail.gmail.com>

To: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>

Cc: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 22:55:55 -0700

Message-ID: <AANLkTimf-vfPdjl8MzXP2Kjf9NA2-aFPb4u1fYvRy21v@mail.gmail.com>

To: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>

Cc: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

I forgot to send a response, but several weeks back we made changes to chapter 3 and fixed up the operator dictionary somewhat that are along the lines you suggested. Take a look at: http://monet.nag.co.uk/~dpc/draft-spec/chapter3-d.html#id.3.2.5.7 In particular, look at 3.2.5.7.2 Default value of the form attribute. There were lots of changes/improvements to the operator dictionary: http://monet.nag.co.uk/~dpc/draft-spec/appendixc.html (the diff marked form of the operator dictionary was messed up when I looked at it) I hope these seem reasonable to you, Neil Soiffer Senior Scientist Design Science, Inc. www.dessci.com ~ Makers of MathType, MathFlow, MathPlayer, MathDaisy, WebEQ, Equation Editor ~ 2010/4/21 Neil Soiffer <neil.soiffer@gmail.com> > > > 2010/4/21 Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr> > > So questions/remarks: >> >> 1) What is the rationale for defining most accents as "postfix" operators? >> > > I don't know the rationale, but I can guess... it is probably some holdover > from when combining chars were used for accents (even though they are not > supposed to be used as combining chars). I was going to say that some, such > as U+02C6 are often interchangeable with their combining char "equivalents" > (eg, U+0302 in this case), but U+0302 is not listed as stretchy (which seems > wrong). > > > 2) The rules for determining the form and the operator dictionary make this >> two cases behave differently: >> - low line: <mover><mi>abcdef</mi><mo>_</mo></mover> (form = infix, so >> not stretchy) >> - overline: <mover><mi>abcdef</mi><mo>‾</mo></mover> (form = >> postfix, so stretchy) >> > > I agree that "low line" seems wrong. > > > >> 3) Why is "check mark" a stretchy accent (or even just a mathematical >> operator)? Is it related to \widecheck (caron) or square root? >> > > I'm not sure when we decided to eliminate it, but "check mark" is not in > the current draft. See > http://monet.nag.co.uk/~dpc/draft-spec/appendixc.html<http://monet.nag.co.uk/%7Edpc/draft-spec/appendixc.html> > > > Note: the Operator Dictionary is non-normative, so you can ignore it as > you please. Nevertheless, it would be good to remove as many errors as > possible from it. We'll discuss these problems at our next MathML meeting. > If you find more, please send them along. > > Neil Soiffer > Senior Scientist > Design Science, Inc. > www.dessci.com > ~ Makers of MathType, MathFlow, MathPlayer, MathDaisy, WebEQ, Equation > Editor ~ > > > >> >> -- >> Frédéric Wang. >> www.maths-informatique-jeux.com >> www.maths-informatique-jeux.com/international >> > >Received on Thursday, 3 June 2010 05:56:29 UTC

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1
: Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:42 UTC
*