Re: Math on the web without MathML (CSS 2.1 rendering for HTML and XML)

Patrick Ion said:
>
> Dear Canonical Scientist Juan,
>
> I assume that you intended to say
>
>> Prof. Hutchinson finished his talk by recognizing that

Dear MathML and AMS author Patrick, thanks by this correction over

[http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2006Jul/0028.html]

> and so on.  However, I don't find the phrasing that seems
> to be important to you in his publicly posted slides.  I
> do note [http://silas.psfc.mit.edu/mathmltalk/] Slide 8's text is

let me introduce quotes from

[http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-math/2006Jul/0025.html]

> <<<
> Conclusions
>
> MathML has a number of weaknesses. But it's close to being the best
> we've got for browsable web publishing of mathematics.

<blockquote>
MathML has a number of weaknesses.
</blockquote>

> Producing MathML from the dominant mathematics authoring systems is
> rather straightforward.
>
> Reading MathML is currently still not as effortless as it needs to   be.
> Browsers need improvements. Progress is being made.
>
> Will MathML "take off" and take over web mathematics publishing?
>
> My guess is that it won't. But with luck it will gradually become   more
> widespread.

Hutchinson asked, will MathML ‘take off’ and take over web mathematics
publishing?

His reply was:

<blockquote>
My guess is that it won’t. But with luck it will gradually become more
widespread.
</blockquote>

> There will remain a place for formats with perfect layout control   (PS,
> PDF etc.) MathML will have to establish its own niche.
> <<<
>
> which does NOT seem to be your quoted
>

why not?


Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)

Received on Thursday, 13 July 2006 16:29:21 UTC