Re: MathML-in-HTML5

David Carlisle wrote:
>> But David, you're _assuming_ XML rules for interpretting
>> namespaces! :> 
> yes but I was answering Bill Hammond's question about

Of course, I understood.  I was just taking the opportunity
to tease, and also the opportunity to summarize
(as I understand it) that we currently seem wedged
between a desire to simplify (and avoid namespaces)
and a desire for IE to work as is (w/o waiting \infty for IE8).

... I guess I'll take that as a further opportunity
to reiterate that point :>

>>> In application/xhtml+xml there seems to be more than one understanding...
> so xml is implied here (despite the subject line)
>> While I certainly sympathize with Bill on wanting to
>> have such nesting possibilities, I'm not fond of adding
>> in little bits here & there.  I'd much rather push for
>> a proper solution at the level of compound documents.
> We're in total agreement here, although whether that's because we've
> independently come to a naturally correct conclusion or if it's just
> that we've both been fully absorbed into the collective group-think of
> the working group, it's hard to tell... 

A third possibility is that I've simply come under the
sway of your overwhelmingly domineering personality...

(sorry, I'm in a kind of jokey mood today).


Received on Thursday, 12 October 2006 15:58:25 UTC