- From: Michael Kohlhase <m.kohlhase@jacobs-university.de>
- Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2014 12:18:57 +0200
- To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, Andrew Robbins <andjrob@gmail.com>, <www-math@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <53427B91.7050404@jacobs-university.de>
Dear David, dear all, I agree with David's conclusion - grudgingly. But I would like to point out that the OpenMath compatibility argument is somewhat problematic for several reasons * strict content MathML is an implementation of _OpenMath Objects_ not of the XML endocing, so attributes do not even come in here. * OpenMath has a single <OMBVAR> element as opposed to multiple <bvar>s in strict content MatHML * having commonAtt on bvar gives you nothing that you could not do by putting them on the variables themselves. So putting the attributes on <bvar> gives another problem with canonical representation that we do not really want to have. But of course, I do not feel that we have much choice but arrive at David's conclusion. Michael On 7.4.14 11:18, David Carlisle wrote: > 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 > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase, Office: Research 1, Room 168 Professor of Computer Science Campus Ring 1, Jacobs University Bremen D-28759 Bremen, Germany tel/fax: +49 421 200-3140/-493140 skype: m.kohlhase m.kohlhase@jacobs-university.de http://kwarc.info/kohlhase ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 7 April 2014 10:19:24 UTC