- From: Max Berger <max@berger.name>
- Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:23:25 +0100
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: www-math@w3.org
- Message-Id: <1197887005.3858.21.camel@ochsner.dps.uibk.ac.at>
Dear Henri, OpenOffice uses: <math:annotation math:encoding="StarMath 5.0">...</math:annotation> to describe the "source" for the MathML encoded in its ODF (OpenDocument Formula) files. This works very well within Openoffice and related products, which use this information when re-reading files. Hth Max Berger On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 10:23 +0200, Henri Sivonen wrote: > As far as I can tell, MathML 2.0 doesn't define a mechanism that's > allow implementations to implementations to use interoperable values > for the encoding attribute on <annotation> and <annotation-xml>. The > spec gives four tokens leaving their meaning implicit: MathML- > Presentation, MathML-Content, TeX and OpenMath. > > In the MathML 3.0 draft, the encoding attribute on <annotation> seems > to take a MIME type, such as text/latex or text/maple, or a product > name token like Maple, Mathematica or TeX. > > In the MathML 3.0 draft the encoding attribute on <annotation-xml> is > said to take a namespace URI but examples use tokens such as OpenMath. > > Using a namespace URI as the encoding attribute value seems redundant > and unnecessary. Why wouldn't the consuming application inspect the > namespace of the child element? > > <annotation> and <annotation-xml> appear to be so vaguely defined that > I have to doubt their interoperable implementability. Have they been > implemented in applications that consumes MathML? If they have been > implemented, have they been implemented interoperably? If they are now > interoperably implemented, it would be good for the spec to define how > to consume them in the way that is interoperable. >
Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 10:23:21 UTC