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

Re: Draft Node: Fill in the Blank

From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 07:21:41 +0200
Cc: "Neil Soiffer" <neils@dessci.com>, <www-math@w3.org>
Message-Id: <348255B1-E332-4595-9B28-30E8AE37477F@hoplahup.net>
To: Paul Topping <pault@dessci.com>

Le 7 juil. 2012 à 21:34, Paul Topping a écrit :

>> 
>> If we allow several expressions associated to a blank then it also
>> makes sense to allow one that allows the recipient user-agent (e.g. a
>> web-page with some javascript) to compare the user-input with the one
>> (given some flexibility).
> 
> So this would be the "correct answer" typically, right? I imagine that some won't want to use that as it would be open to cheating by anyone that can View Source on the page. Still, that's probably not a reason to omit it.

It would be an basis for a correct answer, whichever that basis is.
It could allow, for example, a stateless direct communication to an evaluation service and this data would then be used as a predicate or function to evaluate where to go once this is submitted; see an example below.

>> My concern now is whether it is good to allow multiple children. From
>> this discussion it sounds unavoidable. And if we do so, how do we
>> markup so that renderers that are unaware of this note still render
>> something partially useful?
> 
> Can we not tell page authors to use CSS in the page source HTML to hide those parts that should not be visible? 

I'm surprised this is coming of you since MathPlayer would have to implement CSS extra for it to work, if I do not mistake.

I am thinking that for more complex expressions there are better markups for this.

One possibility, that would change radically the current, is to use the semantics and annotation-xml representations alternatives as below. This should be processed by all MathML-compliant processors into ignorance for all but the first child of the semantics element and for, those would would support fill-in-the-blanks, into an expression with a more elaborate function.

But this looks like too radical a change.

Paul

<semantics>
  <mrow>....(I am a prompt)....</mrow>
  <annotation-xml cd="fill-in-the-blanks" name="phantom" encoding="MathML-presentation">
	<mroot><mfrac><mrow>1</mrow><mrow>x^2+1</mrow></mroot>
  </annotation-xml>
 <annotation-xml cd="fill-in-the-blanks" name="evaluator" encoding="OpenMath">
        <OMOBJ xmlns="http://www.openmath.org/OpenMath">
          <OMBIND>
            <OMS cd="fns1" name="lambda" />
            <OMBVAR>
              <OMV name="f" />
            </OMBVAR>
            <OMA>
              <OMS cd="arith1" name="plus" />
              <OMA>
                <OMS name="minus" cd="arith1" />
                <OMV name="f" />
                <OMA>
                  <OMS cd="arith1" name="divide" />
                  <OMI>1</OMI>
                  <OMI>1</OMI>
                </OMA>
              </OMA>
              <OMA>
                <OMS cd="arith1" name="power" />
                <OMV name="x" />
                <OMI>2</OMI>
              </OMA>
            </OMA>
          </OMBIND>
    </annotation-xml>
</semantics>

  
Received on Monday, 9 July 2012 05:22:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 9 July 2012 05:22:12 GMT