RE: Grand unified entity definition set [was: Errors in MathML DT D]

David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@nag.co.uk] wrote on 20 April 2003 11:06:
> Makes sense to me. Apart from the directory/web site layout I 
> have long
> been pushing for a "grand unified entity definition" set that would
> not be so closely tied to mathematics and would be consistent between
> mathml and xhtml on the w3c side and also docbook and tei etc further
> wide. Currently no two of those have compatible entity definitions
> (see a long diatribe on this at http://www.w3.org/Math/characters)

That would be a very good idea. I tend to consider the various entity
definition sets as identical, but I know they are not. 

Elsevier's DTDs have a large set of entity definitions, but it surprises me
each time again when I realize that this is just a side effect of including
the MathML DTD. 

With kind regards,
Simon Pepping
DTD Development and Maintenance
Elsevier
s.pepping@elsevier.com
www.elsevier.com/locate/sgml