Re: MATH

> [James Ø. Baum]
> >I agree with you there, and was aware of the issue, but I still maintain that 
> >the author should be given the opportunity to omit the <math> tags around 
> >'math symbols' such as &le; - definitely not all uses of this symbol are in 
> >mathematical contexts
> (... snip ...)
> ><math>&alpha; &beta; &gamma; </math> are the first letters of the greek 
> >alphabet and a priori have nothing to do with mathematics though they are 
> >often used there.
> 
> 	I agree on your principle:  Sumbols often used in math, but
> 	which a priori have nothing to do with mathematics, should be
> 	allowed outside of <math>...</math>.  The greek letters make a
> 	good example.  But relational symbols like &le; (<=)?  Please
> 	correct me if I am wrong, but aren't they pure mathematical
> 	symbols?  I cannot think of any example of the use of (e.g.) <=
> 	outside of a mathematical context.
> 
> 
> 					B/H
> 
> -- 
> Bjørn-Helge Mevik	<bhm@math.uio.no>
> 
> 

Thats not the point. Authors are guaranteed to try to use these symbols 
outside of <math> so any good browser would have to support them anyway - so 
why not make this the definition! That way we avoid the (IMHO) unwanted 
possibility of a symbol having one representation in and one out of <math> - 
the two examples I recollect here are :
&times; 'x' out of and "centered dot" in <math>
&rarr;  "registered trademark" out of and "right arrow" in <math>

( as represented in arena (reference software according to wc3 (?))
-- 
James Ø. Baum
MA104 Lineær Algebra Fjernundervisningsprosjektet -
MA104 Linear Algebra 'Open University Project'
Institute of Mathematics, University of Oslo, Norway
http://www.math.uio.no/~ma104/

Received on Monday, 13 May 1996 05:42:13 UTC