- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 19:21:36 +0100 (BST)
- To: kamthan@cs.concordia.ca
- CC: www-math@w3.org
Thanks again for your detailed comments! > It may be better to mention exact keyword color names. I am inclined to agree. > "Note that the color name keywords are not case-sensitive, unlike most > keywords in MathML attribute values." > Is mention of this really significant? I think so. It means that GREEN is allowed, even if the list of colours that you suggest above that we make explicit only says green. > 7.2.1 ... It may be clearer if written as Yes, probably true. > A.1 ... Thus, the DTD itself and documents based on it do not > validate. Sorry about that, could you try the DTD update available from http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD > Are all references "non-normative"? Currently yes. I agree some of them probably ought to be normative. > 1. CSS1 revision (revised 11 Jan 1999) could be mentioned. > 2. Perhaps, reference to CSS2 (as an alternate to 1.) could be mentioned, if > Math WG decides to base MathML on it. Yes at least 1. I don't think we use any css2 features, but having a reference anyway wouldn't hurt of course. David
Received on Thursday, 4 May 2000 14:22:52 UTC