- From: Robert Miner <RobertM@dessci.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:27:17 -0500
- To: osserman@math.mit.edu
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
Hi. > Does the phrase 'legacy data' here imply that you expect that MathML > will eventually replace tex as a primary data format? If so, how do > you envision this happening, given MathML unsuitability for direct > authoring? I used "legacy" to merely mean "pre-existing". I've no interest in fighting a religious war about whether TeX is the wave of the future or not. People are free to use whatever software suits them as far as I'm concerned. As to direct authoring, I presume you mean writing code with a text editor. While most folks working with MathML have been primarily interested in graphical authoring, it is a simple matter to define a terse language and compile it into MathML. After all, that is the model of TeX itself, compiling a various macro languages into DVI. It's merely a shame that TeX syntax is not normally regular enough to be particularly well suited to going to XML + MathML, as witnessed by the weakness of current TeX -> XML + MathML converters. But it really is a triviality to come up with a language as terse as TeX that maps directly and unambiguously to some XML + MathML doc type. For example, just changing <foo>...</foo> to \foo{...} and adding some default tokenization rules (that can be easily overridden) makes authoring MathML comparable to authoring TeX. Its just that there evidently hasn't been enough of a demand for it for anyone to have written a compiler yet... --Robert ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dr. Robert Miner RobertM@dessci.com MathML 2.0 Specification Co-editor 651-223-2883 Design Science, Inc. "How Science Communicates" www.dessci.com ------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2003 13:26:56 UTC