- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:21:39 +0000 (UTC)
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, David Carlisle wrote: >> >> First, it appears that none of the MML files have namespace >> declarations, so they are presumably not MathML files (unless I missed >> something). > > Arguably you are missing a local XML catalogue that defaults the MathML > DTD for a top level math element (which would in turn default the > namespace declaration) According to the Namespaces in XML spec: # If correct operation with such applications is required, namespace # declarations MUST be provided either directly or via default attributes # declared in the internal subset of the DTD. ...so I think if the test cases are to be useful with, e.g., Mozilla or any other Web browser that might be implementing MathML, the namespace declarations should be given. > My only request would be for a much simpler version of > the test suite that doesn't depend on (e.g.) XSLT, but just has the sample > rendering, the test rendering, and "next" and "prev" links. That way it > would be less distracting when going through and testing several dozen > tests at once. > > The XSLT is there as current browsers won't (or wouldn't at the time) > render the files at all without it. Those are presumably not conformant implementations, though, so why would the test suite have workarounds for them? > For bulk testing you should be able to grab the zip file and then use > the mml files locally (which don't have the xslt dependency) Unfortunately they don't have the reference image, which is required to know if the UA is implementing the result correctly or not. Cheers, -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 22 April 2004 07:33:16 UTC