- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 22:18:28 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 8 Jun 2006, Henri Sivonen wrote: > > > > If we made MathML work in HTML, possibly with rules that make the > > syntax easier (by implying tags as I suggested earlier) > > The implied stuff seems scary. I was hoping for no more tag inference > beyond HTML 4 legacy. Oh? Why? > FWIW, I completely agree with James Graham that automatic conversion > from LaTeX is *the* top-of-the-list requirement for any kind of Web > math. (It follows that it is futile to insist on semantics that you > can't pull out of LaTeX as it is normally authored.) I gather that > TeX4ht is the state of the art here. That already puts MathML ahead of > anything else that WHAT WG could come up with. Running code rules. > (Forget latex2html.) So making MathML+XHTML work in text/html would be a good thing, then? (That's basically what I'm proposing here.) > If the WHAT WG really intends to address math, I think it would make > sense to start by interviewing Roger Sidje, Jacques Distler, Eitan M. > Gurari and Robert Miner to find out what they think are the problems > that need to be solved (if any). Roger Sidje is the one who originally suggested to me that WHATWG should merge MathML into HTML5. I'll send some mails. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:18:28 UTC