Re: Summary of MathML call meeting

On 25/02/2019 23:38, Neil Soiffer wrote:
>  Ultimately, we agreed past MathML deprecated features should not be
> part of core, nor should features (whatever they are) that will be
> deprecated for MathML 4. Many of the issues listed for potential
> deprecation were because they didn't belong in core either because
> they were redundant or conflicted with CSS. The group agreed that
> isn't necessarily a reason to deprecate a feature. E.g., a feature
> could still be in the "full" (or whatever we call it) MathML spec, but
> polyfilled so it works in core. On the other hand, this is an
> opportunity for cleanup of the spec, so the listed issues in [1] are
> candidates for deprecation (note: several people felt some features
> such as beveled fractions should not be deprecated and should be in
> core). People are encouraged to look at the issues and comment.

Hi,

I don't remember exactly what was the consensus but at least we agreed
that deprecated features should not be part of core. I checked this was
already the case for the attributes mentioned in
https://github.com/mathml-refresh/mathml/issues/5#issuecomment-472827820
so nothing to for MathML core.

Do I remember correctly that we agreed to remove menclose "radical"
notation and mglyph (currently not in core):

https://github.com/mathml-refresh/mathml/issues/3

https://github.com/mathml-refresh/mathml/issues/25

I'm asking because I need to know the consensus before moving to WPT /
browser tasks on these. If this is not controversial, we can just
formally approve this next Monday.

Thanks,

-- 
Frédéric Wang

Received on Thursday, 14 March 2019 13:39:25 UTC