- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 09:37:59 +0000 (UTC)
- To: White Lynx <whitelynx@operamail.com>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
On Wed, 19 May 2004, White Lynx wrote: >> >> CSS extensions are significantly more complicated to implement and test >> than the equivalent MathML. MathML is self-contained, you only need to >> test how it interacts with the MathML around it. CSS extensions have to >> apply to all namespaces, and have to interact with the rest of CSS. > > Agree. But it is worth to do especially when extensions are not 'ad hoc' > extensions targeted on mathematics but can be used in other markup > languages apart of MathML. And one is talking about few not too > sophisticated CSS extensions. No one requires to rebuild whole CSS > visual rendering model. If there are indeed soe nice generic extensions to CSS then adding them to CSS3 would be a fine thing (although bear in mind that most UA implementors have indicated that they have no intention of implementing CSS3 any time soon). I was talking about MathML-specific extensions to CSS designed to make MathML possible, since that is what I thought this thread was about. -- Ian Hickson )\._.,--....,'``. fL U+1047E /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. http://index.hixie.ch/ `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 19 May 2004 05:38:00 UTC