W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > April 2014

Re: Bind and Bvar

From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 10:18:59 +0100
Message-ID: <53426D83.2000502@nag.co.uk>
To: Andrew Robbins <andjrob@gmail.com>, www-math@w3.org
On 07/04/2014 06:09, Andrew Robbins wrote:
> In the human-readable version of MathML3, bvar allows CommonAtt for
> both Strict Content and Full Content, ... but in the DTD and RNC
> versions, the bvar element does not allow any attributes.
>
> My question is which is wrong? the DTD/RNC? or the text? I would like
> to be able to use id and class on bvar, but my documents will not
> validate if I do.
>
> Regards, Andrew Robbins
>


Thank you for your message.

The intended usage is as shown in

http://www.w3.org/Math/draft-spec/chapter4-d.html#contm.bvar

with the id on the ci child of bvar

Which matches the text and the schema.

However...

You are correct to report though that the syntax table for bvar lists
CommonAtt....


Strict Content MathML is intended to be an encoding of OpenMath, and the
OpenMath Schema allows id on the corresponding OMBVAR element.

Also the MathML2 DTD allowed id on bvar.


So I think the status is that the normative table is to be assumed
correct and that CommonAtt are allowed.

Almost all of the schema is mechanically constructed from the tables in
the spec, but bvar, as the interaction with strict Content MathML is a
bit tricky, was done by hand....

This is a personal response but I'll fix the schema to add CommanAtt
unless working group shouts.



David
Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 09:19:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:47 UTC