- From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 21:40:24 +0100
- To: beshenov@bk.ru
- CC: www-math@w3.org
[adding -www-math back to cc list] Hello! >> After the some tests, we found that there are too many bugs in >> MSIE parser to use it for rendering XML (it can't process >> xhtml-math11-f.dtd, for example). DC> IE can parse the normative DTD at DC> http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtml-math11-f.dtd DC> Are you using a different, older, version of the DTD? Sorry, it is my error. Thanks! Last versions of MSIE CAN parse DTD. But there are different problem. MSIE downloads DTD's and XSL's from w3.org (or it's copies on same servers) too slow. Oh yes, that is certainly the case. As discussed on this a day or so ago, I tend to avoid putting a doctype on files served as XML, for this reason So, during the usability tests we found that many users with dialup connections can't wait for downloading, they think that something is incorrect and closing pages. I'm not surprised. While I was editing that DTD _I_ was working over a dialup connection most of the time doing a CVS check over the phne wasn't a lot of fun either:-) There si however no need to put a DOCTYPE on the file at all in most cases. If you _do_ use a DOCTYPE make sure it is the standard xhtml+mathml one that is recognised by mathplayer then mathplayer will intercept the document and stop IE downloading the DTD, and add any object etc that is needed. MSIE process Math with downloading DTD's, gecko's don't. Maybe, in some cases sending "text/html" is good solution ?.. It's good in the sense that it works, but it's bad in the sense that it is just wrong a document served as text/html should be HTML or (arguably) XHTML 1.0 meeting the "compatibility requirements". an XHTML+MathML document is neither of those things. Yes If you put on a DOCTYPE send the document as >> That's why we need to send "text/html". In this case, IE plugin is >> only Active-X object, connected via "object" XHTML element. DC> If you use the MathPlayer 2 that should not be necessary, it can DC> intercept xhtml+mathml documents and internally add the microsoft DC> specific object required. Alternatively if you reference the DC> pmathml.xsl stylesheet, this should work for either mathplayer or DC> techexplorer, for documents served with an xml mime type. Okay, I know. Maybe, CMS is not standard solution, but with CMS we can use user-preferences based on cookies, so, people who installed both MP and TE can choose, what plugin optimization they need. Is it useful?.. In my opinion, it is... Yes I agree. Such a system is often very desirable. I have pushed hard that it should never be _needed._ With, for example the pmathml.xsl stylesheet I wanted it to be possible for people to put up an xhtml+mathml document on a typical "free" website with no possibility of server customisation, ie it should be as easy to put up mathematical document as an textual one. However (as you found) getting such cases to work does involve some compromises that may not be appropriate in all cases (or ever:-) so a server side solution (which will always be more flexible of course) may well be preferable for your application. >> + Gecko requires special fonts. We compiled special package >> containing free TrueType's FreeSerif, FreeSans, CMEX10, CMMI10, >> CMR10, CMSY10, Math1, Math2, Math4, Math5. It is all fonts users >> need. DC> For windows and mac at least MIT made a nice font installer DC> package http://web.mit.edu/atticus/www/mathml/ I know. We used "FreeSerif, FreeSans, CMEX10, CMMI10, CMR10, CMSY10, Math1, Math2, Math4, Math5", because users need math-fonts and good Unicode-fonts (from FSF, for example). Also, it is a problem for newbies to use MIT installer on linux platforms ;-) Am I right?.. It's a problem for _anyone_ to install fonts on linux (or X-windows, not just linux:-) recent builds apparently need you to disable pango as well If you have a simple font installation package for linux that works for linux mozilla builds a_lot_ of people would be interested in that! Anyway, the fonts are not the problem. >> + Gecko can wordwrap math, if math is inline. So, we can specify >> "white-space: nowrap" in the style-sheet, because classical >> math-notation using wordwrap on operators (after the "+", "-", >> "=", for example). So, we don't need simple text wordwrap. DC> I'm not sure what the issue is you are raising here? You can use DC> mrow nesting to control line breaking in mozilla (it never breaks DC> inside an mrow). Okay. But maybe the "nowrap" rule in the CSS-stylesheet is better and more accurate than using the hight-level "mrow" element in EACH formula ?.. yes or no, if you definitely don't want any wrapping then yes, if you do want fner control then perhaps not.Of course mozilla's treatment of mrow is a bit more agressive than suggested by the spec (although it is conformant) The spec suggests that line breaking should be progressively discouraged the deeper the mrow nesting. >> We don't know, why it is so, but after some tests we >> changed "m:" to "mml:" and everything is OK. DC> Odd, if you can reproduce that, take it up with the product DC> maintainers. Ok. >> For MSIE we should send everything as "text/plain". For others -- >> as "application/xml" (xhtml+xml). DC> I assume you mean text/html rather than text/plain. If you are DC> distinguishing on the server, then this is OK, although as I say DC> above you should be able to use (xhtml+xml) in all (or at least DC> more) cases. But if MSIE user have no installed plugins, he can't open xhtml+html's? Right?.. True although you can use application/xml (if using the stylesheet) >> we found that many UA's (old geckos, for example) can't process >> invisible symbols DC> Your CMS option setting preferences sound like a reasonable DC> solution to this problem. Another possibility that allows you to DC> always send invisible operators is to put them in an <mo DC> class="invisible> together with some css that makes these things DC> really invisible even on older mozillas that would otherwise DC> render it as a missing glyph symbol. Maybe, but server-side symbols deleting can be used not only as special option. We can cut invisible operators according to "User-Agent". Also, changing preferences is very simple process. For example: <p><input type="checkbox" name="invisible" />use MathML invisible operators</p> <p>You can switch off option, if you see any strange symbols in this field:</p> <div style="width: 100px; padding: 10px; min-height: 20px; font-size: 150%; font-weight: bold; background: #ddddee; text-align: center; vertical-align: center">⁡⁢</div> <p>If you see only the coloured block, everything is OK. Please, do NOT use this option with aural-brousers.</p> See above, I did not mean to sggest that you should not use server side code, I was just floating other alternatives. [...] Anyway, your comments is very useful and I'll correct the speech. If I resume the main idea of work, using CMS for Math optimization is not the best solution and there are many other solutions, but CMS can be very useful while popular browsers and it's plugins can't process Math in the one manner and some popular releases of programs have bugs in MathML processing. This is true, the same can be said of course of the xsl stylesheets. It's a shame that they have to be there (and the need for them gradually decreases) but they were designed to "hide" any nastyness required to get systems to display mathml, leaving the source files as clean xhtml+mathml files. The server side transforms you suggest are similar in that respect. I hope I didn't imply that the client side solutions were always superior. In fact the argument is moving more and more towards server side solutions I suspect. Having MathML display in netscape mozilla and IE was good progress at the time, but now people want to browse the web on their mobile phone, and these devices require a lot of document manipulation to fit a small screen, and don't offer much in the way of onboard processing, so getting the server to send something more suitable has many advantages.. P.S. I have many problems with posting to www-math, because the system does not sending the approval msgs (or it is the problems with my pop3 provider, I'll try to change pop3 server). Can you forward this to www-math?.. Done. Thanks! ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:40:57 UTC