- From: Nicolas Pillot <nicolas.pillot@polymtl.ca>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 20:36:23 -0400
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
Hello ! Trying to see what were the capabilities of a MathML rasterizer named JEuclid, written in Java, i ran it through the test-suite. I needed to add the DTD because Jeuclid tries to validate each file before conversion. I know there is a catalog that can be used, but i can't seem to get it to work, but this problem is only mine ;-) For those who may be interested, the results are available on the web and sum up what works and what does not in Jeuclid 2.0. Another thing i noticed during the tests, were the failures/missing things that i think were independant of Jeuclid : they are to be found in the 'bad' and 'alone' section. It can be reached at the following address : http://info.polymtl.ca/~nipil/mml/index.html The 'alone' section lists mml files without a reference image, which makes it impossible to compare with the rendered image. I think that the 'bad' sections regroups the stuff "should" NOT work, but i put some files in tht may have some mistakes too (and maybe shouldn't, ie non bad*.mml files). These are the following : emptyContent1, mactionBhigh1, mathAdisplay1, mathAdisplay2, mathAmode1, mfracZComp1, nestAction1, nestedMath3 and maybe noChildContent and tooFewContentContainer. You can see the log and error output in the bad/failed section and alone/failed section. My aim here is not to criticize the work done in this testsuite, which is really great. I just want to spot some things i find bizarre, and i would like to know if the failed files are the responsability of the rasterizer or some error in the test-suite. What i trying to get is a comparison of some MathML-aware tools, to have a reliable basis on which one can choose a tool in function of the quality of the output we want. Thank you all for the good job, i hope i do not "disturb" too much ;-) Have a nice day, Nicolas
Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2004 21:24:08 UTC