- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:16:06 +0100
- To: "Aaron M Leventhal" <aleventh@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: brewer@w3.org, "Neil Soiffer" <Neils@dessci.com>, neil.soiffer@gmail.com, "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <oedipus@hicom.net>, public-pfwg-comments@w3.org, unagi69@concentric.net, w3c-wai-pf@w3.org, w3c-wai-pf-request@w3.org
On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:16:01 +0100, Aaron M Leventhal
<aleventh@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> In general we agreed with what you say below on the last PF call.
> However,
> some felt that specifying TeX or whatever should be a best practice and
> not in the spec.
But how do you implement it? Should the UA autodetect whether it's TeX or
LaTeX or something else? How are authors supposed to know what to write?
How do we achieve interoperability? What's the advantage of leaving it
open-ended?
> See the thread I started called 'New role="math" in ARIA, how to author
> and how browser would expose it'
> In that thread we're discussing some of the remaining issues, and you can
> see the current definition.
The current definition doesn't seem to handle:
<object role="math" data="foo">a^2+b^2=c^2</object>
Also, when would it be better to have the expression in another element
than as text in the element itself (i.e. when is labelledby needed for
role=math)?
Finally, I don't know (La)TeX very good, but shouldn't $ or $$ be implied
around the expression?
--
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2008 16:42:09 UTC