Re: Exploring new vocabularies for HTML

Ian Hickson <> writes:

>> > For example, it seems like this:
>> >
>> >    <math> 3 + n = 6 </math>
>> as in the March 1995 draft of HTML 3.0 ??
> No, not at all. The idea would be that the parser would automatically 
> infer the tag names and so the DOM would look exactly like it would for 
> this markup:
>    <math> <mrow><mn>3 </mn><mo>= </mo><mi>n </mi><mo>= </mo><mn>6 </mn></row></math>
> This is the same way that the following two HTML4 snippets are exactly 
> equivalent and generate the same underlying DOM:
>    <p><table><tr><td></table>
>    <p><p><table><tbody><tr><td></td><tr></tbody></table>
> The "tbody" isn't in the original markup, but it's still in the DOM.

Yes, thanks to the doc type definition of HTML4.

But there's no analogous automatic content model for the math.

More to the point -- and the reason for my allusion to March 1995 --
is this: How will you persuade browser authors to provide this
non-trivial service?  It looks like sand-bagging to me.

                                    -- Bill

Received on Sunday, 30 March 2008 19:48:43 UTC