- From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 09:02:06 -0400
- To: www-math@w3.org
David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> writes:
>> In application/xhtml+xml there seems to be more than one understanding
>> among current user agents on the question (given the use of namespace
>> prefixing) of whether or not inside an "m:math" element unprefixed
>> subelements (at all depths) are mathml.
>
> As far as the specification goes (which is, I think what Mozilla does)
> the situation is clear: Elements in the MathML namespace (whether
> prefixed or not) are MathML, elements that are not in the MathML
> namespace (whether prefixed or not) are not MathML.
For application/xhtml+xml my impression is that Mozilla does _not_
recognize, for example, unprefixed MathML leaf elements inside an
<m:math>, while it does recognize them inside <math xmlns=...>.
> Mozilla actually implements a compound document format where mathml, xhtml
> (and probably svg) can be nested in ways that are not individually
> sanctioned by the respective specs but in ways that could be sanctioned
> by schema languages designed for the purpose, such as
> ISO/IEC 19757-4 NVDL (Namespace-based Validation Dispatching Language)
> http://www.nvdl.org/
Might one not have user agent internal security concerns about this
unless validation by user agents is mandated? My impression is that
browser-class user agents don't want to touch validation at all.
> Rather than start adding html-like elements such as <b> <i> to <mtext>
> which might look natural in mathml-in-xhtml but would look distinctly
> odd in mathml-in-xslfo or mathml-in-docbook, I think we should keep the
> leaf elements in "pure" mathml as more or less just pcdata, ...
So let's go with <mspan> (for pcdata, allowed only in <mtext>) for
text styling via CSS and <mlink> (attribute href, content pcdata,
allowed only in <mtext>) for "web page anchors" with text/html
compatibility.
-- Bill
Received on Thursday, 12 October 2006 13:02:26 UTC