Re: request for comments HTML WG comments to MathML WG

On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 14:56:14 +0100, Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Ah. Referencing HTML4 seems useless since HTML4 doesn't support embedding
>>> MathML inline.
>>>
>>
>> Color names are pulled from the HTML4 spec,
>
> Hmm. Firefox seems to support SVG color keywords as well (but not the CSS2
> system colors).
>
> Is there a reason MathML doesn't use css3-color SVG color keywords instead
> of HTML4 color keywords?
>

I'll look at the document, and if not reason is given, will add this
as a comment.

>
>> and it's mentioned again
>> in Chapter 6[1], with an unnamed aside to HTML5:
>>
>> "To be effective, MathML must work well with a wide variety of
>> renderers, processors, translators and editors. This chapter raises
>> some of the interface issues involved in generating and rendering
>> MathML. Since MathML exists primarily to encode mathematics in Web
>> documents, perhaps the most important interface issues relate to
>> embedding MathML in [HTML4] and [XHTML], and in any newer HTML when it
>> appears."
>>
>> So anything I comment on related to MathML in HTML, rather than XHTML,
>> is somewhat moot, because the document just does not recognize MathML
>> in anything but an XML-based syntax, such as SVG or XHTML.
>>
>> Speaking of which, there are new elements, and new constraints on
>> structure. We may have to do our own updating in the HTML5 document,
>> if we decide to reference MathML 3.0 instead of MathML 2.0. I didn't
>> examine this aspect of the document.
>
> I see there's a new element called <td> in the index. But the link goes to
> the definition of <mtd>. Is it a mistake?
>

I would say mistake, but again, will add as comment.

> The index lists my:color and my:background, but these don't seem to be
> actual attributes that MathML defines but just arbitrary namespaced
> attributes used as an example (it doesn't even say what the namespace is).
> Maybe these should be excluded from the index to avoid confusion.
>

Will add as another comment. Thanks for these!

> As far as I can tell, there are no new elements or attributes that use
> uppercase characters and no new namespaced attributes, and no new conflicts
> with HTML element names. Thus, as far as I can tell, MathML 3.0 should be
> supported by HTML5 without any change to HTML5.
>

Cool, thanks for checking.

>
>>>
>>> http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/named-character-references.html#named-character-references
>>>
>>
>> I did not find some of the named entities listed in the MathML named
>> entities draft in the entities given in the HTML5 draft.
>
> The entities in HTML5 are generated from the same source as the entities in
> MathML 3.0. However, I think entities that expand to multiple characters are
> excluded from HTML5. I don't know why there are entities that expand to
> multiple characters and I don't know why they are excluded from HTML5.
>
>
>>> The special doctype can be used in XHTML5.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, yes. Well, this is also another area of difference between the
>> MathML document and HTML5.
>
>
>>> Ah. I guess it should be updated to include the latest set of entities.
>>> (Minting a new FPI for MathML 3.0 seems bad since it will break compat
>>> with
>>> shipped Firefox.)
>>>
>>
>> There are differences from both XHTML 1.0 and MathML 2.0, as shown in
>> the new working draft [2].
>>
>> Would you like me to add this as a comment?
>
> Sure. (It's not clear to me why we're not just cc-ing the MathML WG in this
> discussion.)
>


Paul asked that I put together a list of comments and send to this
group for discussion and modification before sending as comments from
the HTML WG to the MathML WG.


> --
> Simon Pieters
> Opera Software
>

Shelley

Received on Thursday, 5 November 2009 14:46:04 UTC