RE: menclose

> > NESWstrike
> > NWSEstrike
> > WEstrike
> > NEcorner
> > SEcorner
> > SWcorner
> > NWcorner
> >
> upwardsstrike
> downwardsstrike
> horizontalstrike
> verticalstrike
> upperleft
> upperright
> lowerleft
> lowerright

I find the latter set of names more intuitive than the compass directions. I
like them esp. for the corners and the horizontal and vertical. I am less
sure about upward and downward, but I do believe that they are unambiguous.

verticalstrike does not work with menclose. It was not in Robert's list.

I do prefer the longer variants, with strikeout and corner; they describe
the intention. 

I do not like the double s in upwardsstrike; I will forget to write it most
of the time.

Regarding the earlier discussion about the DTD. I consider the DTD as an
approximation of the standard. When the text lists three allowed values for
the attribute, then that is the MathML spec. So the current discusson is
about an extension of the spec.

Simon Pepping
DTD Development and Maintenance

> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: 07 August 2003 14:33
> To: Neil Soiffer
> Cc: Robert Miner;
> Subject: Re: menclose
> There is also precedent in the entity names for using directions, for
> example nwarr and nearr in isoamsa.ent (nwarrow, nearrow in 
> mmlalias.ent).
> Personally I think upwards/downwards for the diagonal strokes could be
> slightly ambiguous (I know some Windows people who insist on 
> calling \ a
> forwards slash); using compass directions leaves no doubt.
> John.
> -----------------------------
> John Pedersen
> Content Systems,
> John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Received on Friday, 8 August 2003 06:36:22 UTC