- From: Frank Yung-Fong Tang <franktang@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 19:01:59 -0500
- To: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>, www-math@w3.org, public-qt-comments@w3.org
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 23:52:13 +0100, Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org> wrote: > > Le 8 mars 05, à 23:17, Frank Yung-Fong Tang a écrit : > > Isn't there a large danger that the expressible formulae in MathML > content become unparseable, or inefficiently executable, for an XQuery > interpreter ? If such danger exist, then why W3C ever release MathML? If MathML content will easily become unparseable for XQuery interpreter , then in what sense it could be parseable for other application? If MathML content will easily become inefficiently executable for XQuery interpreter , then in what sense it could be efficiently executable for other applications? I am not saying that the issue you concern about is not there. But if they are valid concern for XQuery, then it probably will be valid concern for any other single thing ... > In few lines of math you reach the limbos of the undecidability... not > something you wish for XQuery, I believe. If I will reach the limbos of the undecidableity in XQuery with few lines of math, then I will reach the same limbos of undecidableity with few lines of math in other places which use MathML Content Markup, right? Then.... why should W3C ever recommend MathML 2.0 ? > > Or... I have not understood your suggestion... > > paul > -- Frank Yung-Fong Tang 譚永鋒 Šýšţém Årçĥîţéçţ
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2005 00:02:30 UTC