- From: Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 22:53:32 +1200
I'll speak up as one of the Mozilla layout developers, but speaking only for myself. Since we already have a MathML implementation --- which works fairly well in my experience --- I think it makes more sense from our point of view to fix/improve MathML than to deal with new CSS extensions to get decent rendering. MathML's purported incompatibilities with DOM and CSS are not serious from an implementor's point of view, at least no worse than lots of other CSS-unfriendly content we have to deal with. I hope that the fonts issue gets better when comprehensive STIX fonts are freely available online and we can automatically download them whenever they're needed. I strongly agree with Hixie and others that a new math dialect for HTML needs to be proven before it can be standardized as *the* preferred solution for mathematics in HTML. If MathML is as bad --- and CSS2.1 as adequate --- as some say, then it should be easy to create a microformat that becomes more popular than MathML. At that point there is a much stronger case for inclusion. I would also like to see a complete description of the CSS extensions required for real high-quality rendering. >From my point of view, a <fraction> element that can be implemented using inline-block in the UA style sheet seems like a reasonable thing to support in HTML5, since it's basically no effort and is a small increment over existing <sup> etc. Rob -- "[But] he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. Isaiah 53:5] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20060620/220f8e71/attachment.htm>
Received on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 03:53:32 UTC