- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:45:35 -0600
- To: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
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