Re: Some feedback from Chemistry CG

Since subscripts and superscripts should not be read in a default way, at
least msub/msup need to be tagged in some way if the base isn't tagged.
Because something needs tagging, I do think Chemistry needs to be in level
1.

    Neil


On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 1:50 PM Deyan Ginev <deyan.ginev@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for forwarding Neil!
>
> It is indeed curious that they are basically asking for a
> presentation-tree readout, no need for semantics at all -- even the
> subscripts are read as-is. If we are to agree with that feedback
> unconditionally, one wonders if we should be excluding chemistry from
> level 1 entirely, as it won't have any material impact compared to raw
> pMML, and it may get the acceptable level of speech without any
> additional annotation work.
>
> Greetings,
> Deyan
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 1:07 PM Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> > With Cary's permission, I am forwarding this message from the Chemistry
> CG to the MathML mailing list.
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Supalo, Cary A <csupalo@ets.org>
> > Date: Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 4:09 PM
> > Subject: RE: Request for phone meeting
> > To: Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Neil,
> >
> >
> >
> > A small group of chemistry community members met informally last week to
> discuss your request more at length. The following bulleted list of points
> are what we perceive as a starting point for a fruitful discussion on what
> further disambiguation of chemistry terminology is needed to support this
> collaborative effort between the MathML and the chemistry community. We
> feel and know that without the strong collaboration we have, and without
> the input from the MathML community, it would be a detriment to the print
> disabled communities. On our initial assessment of your request at our last
> meeting, we have three examples of conventions we would like to see fully
> implemented:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > We feel elements and compounds should be read as letters, including the
> designation of the capital letter. Sodium (Na), for example, should be read
> “cap N a”. Chlorine (Cl) as “Cap C l”. Sodium chloride “cap N a cap C l”.
> Methane (CH4) as “cap C cap H sub 4”.
> >
> >
> >
> > With regards to the question regarding elements and compounds being read
> with their proper names we feel is a pedagogical question that should be
> left up to the individual user to decide. If they wish proper names to be
> spoken by their screen reader, this can be enabled by means of the custom
> language dictionary that is offered by JAWS and NVDA.
> >
> > We also feel strongly that units should be read as units. We imagine
> MathML probably already has many unit designations already that we can
> leverage. Chemistry content should be able to benefit from the same unit
> designations.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anything that is not disambiguated/defined in our table should also be
> read “as is,” as the letters they are defined.
> >
> >
> >
> > We hope this clarification is the first step to a lengthier discussion
> on optimization of disambiguation of chemistry content. It was our position
> all along that the table we provided to the MathML group was a first step.
> We welcome the opportunity to meet with you to discuss logical next steps
> at future meetings. We welcome and highly value this collaboration between
> the chemistry and math ML communities. If you would like to include this
> type of topic as an agenda item for a future Chemistry Community meeting,
> we are certainly happy to do so.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you very much for your continued support of our community where we
> value your input and feedback highly.
> >
> > Cary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu>
> > Sent: Sunday, August 30, 2020 12:35 AM
> > To: Supalo, Cary A <csupalo@ets.org>
> > Cc: Barrett, Dan <Dan.Barrett@hmhco.com>
> > Subject: Re: Request for phone meeting
> >
> >
> >
> > The MathML CG talked about chemistry issues a little this week in the
> context of a larger issue that we are trying to resolve. As I mentioned, a
> subject area sets defaults, so most authors don't need to worry about
> labelling every token. But there are defaults, so every token has a meaning
> given to it by an attr (currently being called "semantics" but likely will
> change).  For chemistry and for that matter, units, the issue came up: how
> detailed are the attr values? For example, do we have semantics="units" or
> do we have semantics="millimeters", etc. For chemistry, is it
> semantics="element" or semantics="hydrogen", etc. I had thought everyone
> was on board with "unit" and "element", but I was wrong, so this issue
> needs to be hashed out. Because this needs resolution, it probably doesn't
> make sense to discuss it at the chem CG call this week.
> >
> >
> >
> > There is a question that you or maybe the group can answer... if I have
> NaCl suitably marked up in MathML, should that always be 'spelled out' in
> speech? If sometimes it should be "sodium chloride" in speech and maybe
> sometimes "salt", who determines that? The author? The reader? The answer
> to that question will inform a discussion about labelling them 'element'
> (which would allow for various forms of speech) vs. specifically labelling
> them 'hydrogen' or for that matter not labeling them at all so that the
> letters are always just the letters.
> >
> >
> >
> >     Neil
> >
> >
>