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.