- From: Bruce Miller <bruce.miller@nist.gov>
- Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 04:25:56 -0500
- To: rbs@maths.uq.edu.au
- CC: dev-tech-mathml@lists.mozilla.org, dev-tech-layout@lists.mozilla.org, www-math@w3.org
rbs@maths.uq.edu.au wrote: > > It is now official. HTML5 is going at W3C (although it isn't called > HTML5 -- at as least as yet). > > The noises have built into a rumble, to the point of reaching the man > himself, Sir Tim BL, if we have to name him: > http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/166 > > "Some things are clearer with hindsight of several years. It is > necessary to evolve HTML incrementally. The attempt to get the world to > switch to XML, including quotes around attribute values and slashes in > empty tags and namespaces all at once didn't work." He also says: "The large HTML-generating public did not move, largely because the browsers didn't complain." although I suspect he misspelt "comply" But seriously, I'd love to see MathML in HTML, provided it was sufficiently MathML-like to fit into reasonable workflows. Currently, I can work with XML data with embedded MathML and generate both HTML(w/images, eg) or XHTML(w/MathML) using stylesheets that are 90-95% shared. If output method='html' were enough to convert real MathML into HTML's MathML, possibly even with some XSLT compatible namespace downgrading, that might be workable from a content generation standpoint. I worry that such almost-MathML wouldn't be recognizable as MathML when cut-n-pasted to other applications, though, which would make the MathML-in-HTML only useful for presentation (useful tho' that is!). These are the concerns I had with some of the ideas being floated within WhatWG; I hope they will carry some weight in the continued development. -- bruce.miller@nist.gov http://math.nist.gov/~BMiller/
Received on Sunday, 29 October 2006 09:26:13 UTC