- From: Bernd Fuhrmann <silverbanana@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:47:01 +0100
- To: www-math@w3.org
> This example helps. The layout you prefer could be done now using something like 4 columns, 6 rows, some appropriate colspan attribute values, and some careful alignment and/or padding. Yes and no: it would work, but it would be bad, though it might be the best solution. However, I tend to use good solutions only, so I will rather risk a more confusing formating that using tables to do sth. that I'm not supposed to do with them. > The real "challenge" is to get from the semantic structure (which is essentially) > [...] >to your preferred layout without human intervention, or more explicit formatting information. XSLT could do that. But it is really dificult to get this to work since I do not know if this problem will ever be treated so that tables can be avoided. If I hadn't that hope, XSLT would be useless since there would be never any better (feasable) solution. So let's assume MathML 3.0 (or whatever) could fix this problem. This might require a significant structural change in all my content which would make XSLT somehow useless. > For example, to mark up Term 7 entirely in a single MathML table cell we would need some sort of malign which interacted with automatic line-wrapping in a new way Yep, we need a new way of treating this, exactly. Well, patience is a virtue! Let's see what future versions of MathML will bring...
Received on Tuesday, 28 October 2003 11:49:52 UTC