Re: minor comments for WD-MathML2-20000328
Thanks for the superlative proofreading.
I'm in charges of corrections for chapter 7, and I think in all cases
except one I have taken your suggestions verbatim, and in the
remaining case, I took the spirit, but reworded the sentence
differently to make a slightly different point.
I had one question over what you intended by way of cleaning up
awkward citations in the first paragraph of chapter 7. In the end, I
just removed the redundant text references to HTML, etc in cases there
there was a link with the same text immediately following. If you had
something else in mind, let me know.
The itemized changes follow:
> In chapter 7, the links to the test suite were "not found." When you
> get them connected, you may wish to keep this advice in mind:
> It says use descriptive text for the link, and keep the text of
> the URI in the source.
> Apparently the use of "we" is frowned on in specifications. This
> report offers ways to avoid it. I couldn't find a proper reference
> for you, but one reason is offered in the final paragraph of
> r/0079.html which explains that first person English is difficult to
> In chapter 7, you could consider making the test suite a numbered
> section (for example, maybe 126.96.36.199 and move Deprecated to 188.8.131.52).
> 7. par. 1 and 7.1 par. 2
> [HTML4] [or 4.01]
What is the point here?
> 7. par. 5
> working group
> Working Group
> 7.1 par. 3
> "...While some popular user agents also support inclusion of
> MathML directly in HTML 4 as "XML data islands," the view
> point we adopt here is that this is a transitional
> strategy, and we don't elaborate on it."
> [No "we". Maybe:]
> While some popular user agents also support inclusion of
> MathML directly in HTML 4 as "XML data islands," this is
> a transitional strategy.
> 7.1.1 par. 8
> math' element
> math element [or `math' element]
> to element
> to an element
> 184.108.40.206 par. 1
> 220.127.116.11 par. 2
> "...After surveying a number of user agents and other
> MathML-aware software applications, we offer the
> following suggestions."
> [Omit "we"; I think you can skip the sentence.]
I agree. It's gone...
> 7.1.2 - mode
> standard CSS2 `display' property
> [CSS2 is not a standard, far as I know. You could just say:]
> CSS2 `display' property
> 7.1.3 par. 7
> consult the W3C Metadata Activity
> [needs a link to http://www.w3.org/Metadata/]
> 7.1.4 par. 1
> they are problems for XML applications in XHTML
> [Not sure here, but I think you mean:]
> they are problems for XML applications and XHTML
I just took the sentence out, since it didn't add much.
> 7.2.1 par. 7
> makes is possible
> makes it possible
> 18.104.22.168 par. 1 We now clarify the relation between deprecated
> features and MathML 2.0 compliance. To clarify the relation between
> deprecated features and MathML 2.0 compliance:
I thought it needed to explicitly state that 'deprecation' was being
defined, so I changed it to:
The following points define what it means for a
feature to be deprecated, and clarify the relation between
deprecated features and MathML 2.0 compliance.
> 7.2.3 par. 3
> mean time
> 7.2.3 par. 6
> "...We trust both authors and applications will use
> non-standard attributes judiciously."
> [As nice as this sounds, to remove the "we" it could say, for example:]
> Authors and applications should use
> non-standard attributes judiciously.
> 7.3 par. 2
> working group
> Working Group
> 7.3.1. par. 2
> Macros has
> Macros have