- From: James Ramsey <jjramsey_6x9eq42@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 16:11:35 -0800 (PST)
- To: www-math@w3.org
- Cc: Barry MacKichan <barry@mackichan.com>
I wrote: >I noticed that in the specifications for MathML, there were plans to >implement macros in order to allow hand-coding of MathML to be much >easier. These are the plans that I was talking about: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-MathML/chapter5.html#sec5.3 So with that little clarification I ask again: Do you plan to have the macros for MathML only be XML-type tags, or do you plan to allow the user to be able to do something perhaps like let "[" and "]" stand for the <apply> and </apply> tags or let "+" stand for <plus/>, etc. I know this would break the XML rules, but I think it might be a good idea to only require the low-level MathML tags to be XML-compliant, and let the macro implementation allow for notations similar to TeX or EzMath. This is in reply to Barry MacKichan <barry@mackichan.com>, who wrote: > > The expectations are that MathML will for the most part be written by tools > that will look something like the current Scientific Word or MathType. The > most natural design for these tools is to parse the MathML and to change the > tree as the user makes changes. Any macro information will likely be lost > when the resulting tree is written out as MathML. Macros are essentially > incompatible with these tools. > > --Barry MacKichan > President, MacKichan Software, Inc. > http://www.mackichan.com == ----I am a fool for Christ. Mostly I am a fool.---- _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Wednesday, 28 October 1998 19:10:22 UTC