Re: Some feedback from Chemistry CG

I agree that they seemed to have missed the main point and focused on my
second question that involved options/flexibility.

    Neil


On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 2:44 PM David Farmer <farmer@aimath.org> wrote:

>
> Is it possible that the Chemistry people completely missed the point
> that we are asking about encoding the meaning of what appears in
> the MathML?
>
> I can see their comments are making sense in the context of advising
> Neil how assistive technology might pronounce "H_2 O".  I do not
> see a reasonable argument against marking up the meaning of the
> symbols in a chemical formula.  And I can see a lot of reasons for wanting
> to do so.
>
> I can also imagine a hierarchy of ways of pronouncing chemical formulas,
> just like there is for reading mathematics.  At one extreme is
> what was written in the shared email:  “cap C cap H sub 4” for methane.
> Next might be "C H 4".  After that might be "methane".  And just like
> in math, the user gets to choose, if the source has been properly
> constructed.
>
> You are reduced to guessing, the exact thing we are trying to avoid,
> if the meaning is not encoded.
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020, Neil Soiffer wrote:
>
> > 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
> >       >
> >       >
> >
> >
> >

Received on Monday, 14 September 2020 22:16:41 UTC