- From: Luca Padovani <lpadovan@cs.unibo.it>
- Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 08:17:27 +0200
- To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
On Sun, 2004-04-18 at 00:28, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > As I understand it, parallel markup is required if one wants to offer > correct sub-term selection well, not _strictly_ required. If you generate properly grouped mathml presentation markup it is possible that the structure of presentation is a refinement of the structure of content. In this case, by adding an attribute on those presentation elements that actually match a content subtree, you're able to discriminate between cosmetic presentation markup and markup that "means something" without looking at the content level. What mixed markup gives you is (among other things) the ability to make the document somehow self-contained, whereas the approach that I just described is useful if you can "trace back" the content from presentation, perhaps looking at the value of those mentioned attributes. Note that this is the approach used in HELM/MoWGLI. --luca
Received on Sunday, 18 April 2004 02:18:41 UTC