Re: Implementation of semantics

On 29/10/2012 20:23, Frédéric WANG wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have some questions about the correct implementation of semantics,
> discussed on the Webkit bug tracker:
>
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100626
>
> So the correct behavior is basically to use the first child as the
> default rendering and find possible alternate renderings among the
> annotation children. Some questions:
>
> 1) Does the following implementation make sense for a browser without
> Content MathML support:
>
> - Test if the first child is a presentation MathML element and if so,
> display it.
> - Otherwise, read the list of other children in that order and display
> the first <annotation-xml> with a known encoding ; or a plain text
> <annotation> if one is found.
>
> 2) I think the first child can only be presentation / content MathML.
> But does that means that an <annotation> or an <annotation-xml> (which
> are MathML elements) can be used as the first child (to include SVG or
> HTML descendants for example)?

No this is invalid according to the MathML3 schema.
>
> 3) What are the official encoding values other than MIME content-type?
> The REC mentions "Content-MathML", "Presentation-MathML" for backward
> compatibility. The W3C note
> http://www.w3.org/Math/Documents/Notes/graphics.xml#svg-in-mathml-guidelines
> also contains the "SVG1.1" value, but is it official?

MathML3 usage tries to move things towards using mime types but for 
historical compatibility reasons the schema allows any string.
>
> 4) The spec says that <semantics> is an embellished operator if the
> first child is one. But should we actually consider the visible child
> (as we do for maction)?
>

Yes, probably. (Perhaps the spec needs some clarification there?)


David

-- 
google plus: https:/profiles.google.com/d.p.carlisle

Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 23:20:02 UTC