W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Namespace prefix or not?

From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:18:35 -0500
To: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>
Cc: Neil Soiffer <NeilS@dessci.com>, "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>
Message-ID: <i71uq8kgxg.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>
Hi Bruce,

> Indeed MathPlayer seems to be accepting it both ways
> (maybe it always did, and my memory's going),
> as does firefox, so the prefix-less way looks like the
> best solution...

I've always thought the verbose way (writing out the xmlns on
each <math> element) was best.

Among the reasons:

1.  A larger class of processors can deal with it.

2.  I want to view xml for documents (as opposed to EDI) as as a
category that is a subcategory of SGML.  (And there continues to be
"political" resistance to the use of xml namespaces in author-level
xml document types for documents.)

3.  With verbose use of xmlns and a few other conventions, it's
possible to generate xhtml+mathml document instances that require only
a couple of revisions near the top to become correct text/html
instances of html5.

4.  I have a private local use sgml definition for a profiled subset
of html5, text/html serialization, as an sgml document type.

BTW, Henri Sivonen's html5 online validator is found at
http://html5.validator.nu/

                                    -- Bill
Received on Sunday, 5 February 2012 23:21:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 5 February 2012 23:21:20 GMT