- From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:20:32 +0200
- To: Stan Devitt <jsdevitt@stratumtek.com>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
Le 12 oct. 05, à 12:43, Stan Devitt a écrit : > While the mime-type warns the client what is coming, it only applies to > the whole document - not individual expressions, and it is the wrong > way round. We want a client to be able to say send me X - not "Oh!, > I can handle X. :)". > [...] > 2) There is no easy way for a client to choose a particular > representation > from the semantics tag. (Choice by order doesn't cut it and there is > no systematic way at present to label a markup by role or purpose) > > Both would be addressable by a systematic labelling scheme for the > expressions in the semantics tag - perhaps a kind of a URI scheme. > > TODO: I think we should add "cleaning this up" to the list of things > to do. (and perhaps content negotiation analogous to language > negotiation) Stan, I agree the mime-type of the content of a semantics element is to be disjoint of the mime-type of the document but don't you think that the type of semantics element (call it a label, an annotation, or...) is close to a mime-type and further than a language ? A mime-type describes possible software operation whereas a language can only be made acceptable or not by a human. I think it is fair for a computer algebra system to describe through mime-types that it suports a set of symbols... paul
Received on Wednesday, 12 October 2005 22:20:40 UTC