Re: semantics, extensibility

Bruce Smith wrote:
> And some people have, I think, said that extensibility is so valuable
> that it's worth putting it into the first version of HTML-Math --


> Again, I suggest that the burden of proof be on those
> who say this is sufficiently easy to do
> in a reasonable time.

I hate to be so blunt, but you will find your proof at
http://www.lfw.org/math/.  Though a few things have been
evolving, it's been sitting there for weeks.