- From: Tab Atkins Jr. via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 20:16:58 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Summarizing some important parts of the minutes: ------------ The core question here is exactly what the intention is for "supporting MathML" to look like. There appears to be broadly three possible approaches: 1. MathML is its own unique thing, a la SVG, and CSS adapts to support whatever it happens to need. 2. MathML leans mostly on CSS to explain itself, with layout algorithms for custom MathML stuff being described in CSS-compatible ways. (For example, defining a `display: math-fraction;` layout.) In other words, we expect that you could take the MathML markup structure, replace it with divs, apply a good chunk of math-specific styling, and get good layout. 3. We figure out how to squeeze CSS into producing math layout, even if that requires a pile of divs to implement properly. Whatever minimal additional powers are needed are added to CSS, but we mostly rely on existing CSS (such as using a vertical flexbox to layout fractions, etc). MathML elements get described in terms of anonymous boxes approximating the pile-of-divs markup structure needed for arbitrary math layout to get the same effect. 1 is the most disruptive and "magic" method; it means that MathML is the only way to do math layout, and any new math layout primitives must be designed by adding to MathML, like SVG is today. 2 is less magic, but still requires a pile of work from both MathML and CSS people, and new types of math layout require adding to CSS. 3 is the least magic, and most supportive of community-driven additions; it's closest to the Extensible Web Manifesto ideals, tho the end result is a bit nastier in the markup. But tooling can generally hide that from us. It's also the least amount of new work, as we're reusing the existing platform as much as possible. --------- The relevance here is that if we go with 3, then this property doesn't make any sense. The effect of the level on the layout is implemented just by outputting different DOM and/or styles. It's only in 1 and 2 that this property would be useful. So we need to decide which strategy we're going with. (I favor 3.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by tabatkins Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/3746#issuecomment-500024465 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 7 June 2019 20:17:00 UTC