- From: White Lynx <whitelynx@operamail.com>
- Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:46:05 +0400
- To: www-math@w3.org
> While Microsoft may have (nasty) business reasons for not supporting > XHTML, they may also have made the argument that the world wasn't ready > to change all their pages into XHTML just for some gain in "purity". It is not necesarily HTML to XHTML transition that was expected to bring benefits to math community, it is SGML to XML transition. If you look at HTML as format for math articles there is nothing particularly valuable in it, look at block level elements that you can use to capture structure of article: all you have is h1-6, p (which by the way can not contain block level elements) and address. Nothing else, no statement, author, theorem, lemma, proof, comment, summary, acknowledgements, references. It is basically useless for math articles, compare it to NIH Journal publishing DTD, DocBook, TEI whatever else we have. And I would not say that Microsoft blocks XML, all Microsofts efforts are pointed in XML direction, they were first to implement XSLT in webbrowser, they converted all office formats (including embedded math formulae) to XML. Another issue is that their browser (ironically including forthcoming MSIE7) is very old and needs major update, lack of support for XHTML provides exellent opportunity to make such an update without facing legacy of their own old bugs and quirks that can not be simply fixed in HTML+CSS+DOM because there are billions of pages that rely on these bugs. -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze
Received on Tuesday, 3 October 2006 08:46:20 UTC