- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 11:25:45 -0400
- To: "Patrick D. F. Ion" <ion@ams.org>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org, w3c-i18n-ig@w3.org
Hello Patrick, I have added the i18n IG (where all your technical discussion is) to the cc, as I did with the original comments, and these comments are I18N WG comments as said in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2003May/0047.html. Again I'm speaking only for myself, but by chance we have a teleconference in a couple hours, so if you don't get anything more from me by 3:00 pm today, this is final. I have looked through your detailed discussion, and I'm okay with the changes you made. Regards, Martin. At 17:09 03/07/02 -0400, Patrick D. F. Ion wrote: >Dear Martin, > >Thank you very much for your characteristically careful >and detailed reading of the MathML 2 Revised Edition draft. >This is, at last, the reply to your various comments and >suggestions dealing with Chapter 6, most of which we have >simply adopted. > >Your comments on the front page, and Chapter 3 and 4, >and Appendices A and B have been addressed separately. >Your message was: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2003May/0026.html > >I hope you will agree that any change not made is properly one of >stylistic preference. > >Best regards, > > Patrick > >------- >------- > >In detail: > >--- >6.1 Introduction > > >>>> ><< It did not fall naturally within the purview of developing a specification ><< enabling mathematics to be used with HTML and producing a DTD for the ><< Working group this to worry about more than the entities allowed in the >DTD. > >>>> > ><< "this" is weird. > >FIXED: A typo from another change. > >========== ><< ><< More general, the I18N WG has on various occasions requested that the ><< introduction in chapter 6 be seriously shortened to make sure the document ><< stays a spec rather than a historical account of a spec's history. > >The text has been shortened quite a bit. However, the presence of >explanatory text, to outline the situation to readers and implementors >who may not be aware of reasons for what they find strange, was >intentional. By and large the MathML spec has been felt to read quite >well. The spec, I suggest, has enough dry technical detail that >few will think it anything else. A history of how the spec came to >be would require a lot more room. > >==== ><< "While a long process of review and adoption by UTC and ISO/IEC of the ><< characters of special interest to mathematics and MathML is now complete ><< (Unicode Work in Progress) there remains the possibility of some further ><< modification of the lists of characters accepted, of the code assignments ><< for those adopted, or of the names given them by Unicode. To make sure any ><< possible corrections to relevant standards are taken into account, and for ><< the latest character tables and font information, see the W3C Math Working ><< Group home page and the Unicode site." > ><< This is highly misleading. There is a very strong commitment by ><< Unicode and ISO to not change any codepoints or names. The characters ><< referenced in the spec to our knowledge all have been fully ><< accepted, and any language such as the above suggesting there ><< will be further changes is highly confusing and misleading and ><< should be removed. > >As you are no doubt aware, although the invariability of a character >standard like Unicode is as desirable as ever, there seem to be changes >afoot again that will affect both mathematical encoding and W3C. >Unfortunately we do not have a situation in which someone can say, >as in the story of Daniel >"O king, establish the decree and sign the writing, that it >be not changed, according to the laws of the Medes and Persians >which altereth not." >Daniel 6:8-9 > >Thus it seems reasonable to retain a weakened version of the text above. >The reference to the Unicode Work in progress has been moved and clarified. > >===== ><< "The parenthetical notation beginning with U+ is one recommended by Unicode ><< for referring to Unicode characters [see [Unicode], page xxviii]." > ><< What about this notation is parenthetical? Proposal: remove >'parenthetical'. >The notation is in parentheses; that's what parenthetical means. >CHANGED for clarity TO >'notation, just introduced in parentheses,' > ><< 'is one' -> 'is the one'; >CHANGED per grammar To >'is that' > ><< also, just introduce the notation, and then ><< avoid to list the same numbers twice, once without and once with U+. >The redundancy was felt to be of possible assistance to those not >already well familiar with Unicode notations for character codes. >==== > >6.2.1 Unicode Character Data > > >>>>>>>> ><< * Using characters directly: For example, an A may be entered as 'A' ><< from a keyboard (character U+0041J). This option is only available if the ><< character encoding specified for the XML document includes the character. ><< Most commonly used encodings will have 'A' in the ASCII position. In many ><< encodings, characters may need more than one byte. Note that if the ><< document is, for example, encoded in Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) then only the ><< characters in that encoding are available directly. Unfortunately, most ><< mathematical symbols may not be encoded as character data in this way. > >>>>>>>> > ><< The last sentence is misleading. Using UTF-8 or UTF-16, the two only ><< encodings that all XML processors are required to accept, mathematical ><< symbols can be encoded as character data. > >As mentioned by David Carlisle >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2003May/0029.html >this didn't get across a point we intended. We can adopt your >sentence: > >LAST SENTENCE CHANGED TO >Using UTF-8 or UTF-16, the only two encodings that all XML >processors are required to accept, mathematical symbols can >be encoded as character data. > >==== > > >>>> ><< By using Character references it is always possible to access the entire ><< Unicode range. > >>>> > ><< 'Character references': inconsistent capitalization. > >FIXED > >===== > ><< 6.2.2 Special Characters Not in Unicode > > >>>> ><< In these cases one may use the mglyph element for direct access to a glyph ><< from some font and creation of a MathML character corresponding. > >>>> > ><< corresponding to what? >To the glyph. The idea is that if you have created a glyph in a font >for mathematical notation not in Unicode, then there's a way to use >it like a character. For instance, if the overcrossing drawn in >knot theory is used in a discussion of knotting of DNA then it is >quite possible that it may need to occur in an equation. <mglyph> >is what you use to do this. > >CHANGED TO >creation of a MathML substitute for the corresponding character. > >===== > ><< 6.2.3 Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols Characters. > ><< there should not be a dot after the title >FIXED >==== > > >>>> ><< The new Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols provided in Unicode 3.1 > >>>> > ><< remove 'new'. Otherwise, the spec already looks outdated ><< before it is approved. >The characters expressly introduced by Unicode to facilitate >mathematical formulas certainly are new. They are the solution >that was found for a specific need in mathematical markup. >It could conceivably have happened that only a few special math >variant markers were introduced, but it did not. > >CHANGED >'new' ===> 'additional' > >===== > >>>> ><< ... in contrast to the Basic Multilingual Plane (BMP) which has been used ><< by Unicode so far. > >>>> > ><< remove temporal context ('so far') > >The addition of many new (additional) planes was an important >change for Unicode. > >'which has been used by Unicode so far' >CHANGED TO >'which was originally the entire extent of Unicode' > >==== > >>>> ><< For example, a Mathematical Fraktur alphabet is being added, and the code ><< point for Mathematical Fraktur A is U1D504. > >>>> > ><< 'is being added' seems to refer to some activity that is now complete. ><< Please update. Also, U1D504 -> U+1D504 > >Wrong tense and wrong code FIXED > >===== > >6.2.4 Non-Marking Characters > > >>>> ><< Some characters, although important for the quality of print or alternative ><< rendering, do not have glyph marks that correspond directly. > >>>> > ><< correspond to what? >To the character, since it is not supposed to create a mark directly. >There are such characters in Unicode. > >ADDED 'to them' >==== > > > >>>> ><< The Universal Character Set (UCS) of Unicode and ISO 10646 continues to ><< evolve, see Section 6.4.4 Status of Character Encodings. A small number of ><< the changes recently introduced, relative to those resulting from the needs ><< of Asian languages, are those designed exactly to facilitate the use of ><< Unicode by the 'equation-writing' community. This specification is written ><< on the assumption that the code assignments suggested to ISO/IEC ><< JTC1/SC2/WG2 by the UTC will be confirmed as they are in public draft forms ><< of Unicode 3.1 and 3.2. As before, we can only reiterate that for latest ><< developments on details of character standards as far as they influence ><< mathematical formalism the home page of the W3C Math Working Group should ><< be consulted. > >>>> > ><< This seems to be totally outdated. Also, >http://www.w3.org/Math/workingGroup ><< does not provide any relevant info. As text such as this has appeared ><< in older versions, http://www.w3.org/Math/workingGroup should contain ><< such info, even if it is just to say that all characters in question have ><< been approved in the meantime. > >This is a piece of text that should have been excised and so we have >a new shortened version (see below). The comments about the character >information that ought to be found on the Math WG page (or IG page >later perhaps) are quite right. It is intended to keep such >information on updates there. > >NEW VERSION ==> > >The Universal Character Set (UCS) of Unicode and ISO 10646 continues to >evolve, see Section 6.4.4 Status of Character Encodings. At the time >of writing the standard is Unicode 4.0. As before, we can only reiterate >that for latest developments on details of character standards as far as >they influence mathematical formalism the home page of the W3C Math >Activity should be consulted. > >==== ><< 6.3 Character Symbol Listings > > >>>> ><< The characters are listed by name, and sample glyphs provided for all of ><< them. Each character name is accompanied by a code for a character grouping ><< chosen from a list given below, a short verbal description, and a Unicode ><< hex code drawn from ISO 10646, now extended in accordance with the proposal ><< forwarded by the UTC to ISO/IEC WG2 in March 2000. > >>>> > >outdated, please fix > >UPDATED > >==== ><< 6.3.1 Special Constants > > >>>> ><< These have been accorded new Unicode values. > >>>> > ><< 'have been accorded': remove temporal reference > >'have been accorded new' >===> >'now have' > >==== > >6.3.4 Negated Mathematical Characters > > >>>> ><< Note that it is the policy of the W3C and of Unicode that if a single ><< character is already defined for what can be achieved with a combining ><< character, that character must be used instead of the decomposed form. It ><< is also intended that no new single characters representing what can be ><< done by with existing compositions will be introduced. > >>>> > ><< There should be an explicit mention of NFC, with a reference to Unicode ><< Standard Annex #15. > >DONE Text and reference added > >==== > ><< 6.3.6 Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols > > >>>> ><< Most of these characters come from the additions to Plane 1, however a few ><< characters (such as the double-struck letters N, P, Z, Q, R, C, H ><< representing common number sets) were already present in Unicode 3.0 and ><< retain their original positions. > >>>> > ><< This is again more version/history-oriented than necessary. What about: > ><< Most of these characters are in Plane 1, except for a few characters (such ><< as the double-struck letters N, P, Z, Q, R, C, H representing common number ><< sets) which are in the BMP. > >It doesn't seem essential to excise the history here, and it helps >some to understand the context. > >===== > ><< 6.4.2 Fewer Non-marking Characters > > >>>> ><< It used to be in MathML 1.0 that there were a number more non-marking ><< character entities listed. > >>>> > ><< 'It used to be' reads like 'once upon a time'. But this is a spec, not ><< a fairy tale. What about: > ><< MathML 1.0 contained a small number of non-marking character entities that ><< have been removed in MathML 2.0. > >I suppose the suggested revision is more machine-friendly. I see no >difficulty with the other, whether or not this spec is a 'fairy tale', >as some have turned out to be for all their technical writing. > >===== > ><< 6.4.4 Status of Character Encodings > ><< This section needs serious rework. Some of the (updated) text is speaking ><< about events in 2001. The section simply should say that earlier ><< versions may have mentioned that different characters were in different ><< stages of adoption in the standards process, but that all characters ><< now in the spec are fully standardized. This is the message that ><< we need to get out, and this is the way to avoid that the spec ><< looks silly in a few years. > > > >>>> ><< Even with the good will shown to the mathenatical community by the Unicode ><< process a small number of characters of special interest to some may not ><< yet have been included. The obvious solution of avoiding their use may not ><< satisfy all. For these characters the Unicode mechanism involving Private ><< Use Area codes could be deployed, in spite of all the dangers of confusion ><< and collisions of conventions this brings with it. However, this is the ><< situation for which mglyph was introduced. > >>>> > ><< This paragraph should be rewritten and shortened, if it belongs ><< into this section at all. It is particularly important to us ><< that mention of the private use area is removed. What about: > >Why is it so important the I18N that the existence of the PUA, >which is a recorded part of the USC and 10646 be denied? It is >part of a real standard. It is not being recommended here, but >its existence is worth a warning. > >A REVISED VERSION version now ends with > >"However, this is the situation for which mglyph was introduced. >The use of <mglyph> is recommended to refer to symbols not included >in Unicode. "
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 11:51:49 UTC