Re: MathML 3.0 far enough along for implementation?

Hello,

Can you please tell me when the last call draft of the schema will be 
released? I have a client that would like to implement the last call 
draft, if it is available in the next few weeks.

Thanks and best regards,

--Scott

Scott Hudson
Senior XML Architect

e: scott.hudson@FlatironsSolutions.com
O: 303.542.2146
C: 303.332.1883
F: 303.544.0522

http://www.FlatironsSolutions.com
Vision. Experience. Engineering Excellence.



Robert Miner wrote:
> A few more things that might be helpful:
>
> - The Math WG has made a real effort to preserve backwards
> compatibility.  
>   There are only a very few minor exceptions.  So you can count on that.
>
> - We are intensively working on a last call draft at the moment, that 
>   should appear next month.  At that point, it will be very stable.  As
>   noted by others, presentation is pretty stable in the current draft, 
>   but content will be changing a good deal.
>
> - If you can tell us anything about the requirements of your client's 
>   application, people may be able to offer some implementation ideas.
>   There are several groups working on implementations, I know.  Plus,
>   people on this list always like to know how MathML is being used!
>
> --Robert
>
>
> Dr. Robert Miner
> W3C Math WG co-chair
> Vice President, Research and Development
>  
> Design Science, Inc.
> 140 Pine Avenue, 4th Floor
> Long Beach, California 90802
> USA
> Main:   (562) 432-2920
> Direct: (651) 223-2883
> Fax:    (651) 292-0014
> robertm@dessci.com
> www.dessci.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-math-request@w3.org [mailto:www-math-request@w3.org] On
>> Behalf Of Scott Hudson
>> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 2:46 PM
>> To: www-math@w3.org
>> Subject: MathML 3.0 far enough along for implementation?
>>
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I have a client that is in the midst of implementing a new content
>> model. They are currently including MathML 2.0, but I wonder if the
>> MathML 3.0 spec is far enough along and backward-compatible enough to
>> recommend implementing against this spec? The immediate advantage, is
>> that both schemas would be encoded in RelaxNG.
>>
>> Thanks and best regards,
>>
>> -- Scott
>> Scott Hudson
>> Senior XML Architect
>>
>> e: scott.hudson@FlatironsSolutions.com
>> O: 303.542.2146
>> C: 303.332.1883
>> F: 303.544.0522
>>
>> http://www.FlatironsSolutions.com
>> Vision. Experience. Engineering Excellence.
>>
>>
>>     
>
>

Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 17:13:36 UTC