- From: Fisher Mark <FisherM@is3.indy.tce.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 May 96 06:58:00 PDT
- To: Dave Carter <dxc@ast.cam.ac.uk>
- Cc: "'MegaZone'" <megazone@livingston.com>, www-html <www-html@www10.w3.org>
>Can someone enlighten me as to exactly why the current <math> draft, and >the arena implementation thereof, was deemed to be not good enough?? Is >this just another case of vendors (in this case Mathematica and Maple) >trying to rewrite a spec to fit in with their products? Why can't we >just add more symbols to the current spec?? From what I understand, the current <MATH> spec is heavy on the presentational aspects but a lightweight in the structural aspects. Automatic processing of <MATH> parts apparently requires better structural support than the HTML 3.0 <MATH> contains. If anyone from the Mathematica and Maple vendors cares to speak up about this, please do so. IANAMW (I am not a Math Wizard). ====================================================================== Mark Leighton Fisher Thomson Consumer Electronics fisherm@indy.tce.com Indianapolis, IN
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 1996 07:58:48 UTC