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

Re: Update to The MathML3 DTD

From: William F Hammond <hammond@csc.albany.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:44:28 -0500
To: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>
Cc: W3C Math Discussion <www-math@w3.org>
Message-ID: <i7sirn6b2b.fsf@hilbert.math.albany.edu>
David --

Thanks for your reply on 03/02/2014 22:26 to my message of
03/02/2014 19:51.

You write in part:

> Perhaps, although since the current incarnation of the HTML
> WG doesn't provide one I am not sure the Math WG should be
> responsible for maintaining an HTML schema, but see below.

As I understand html5, it seems to have been deliberately
designed, e.g., its transparent content model (tag leapfrog
-- albeit for reasons that do have some rationale) to
circumvent the ground rules for both XML and SGML.  In view
of that (so long as it stands), one can only think about
formally defining a usage profile as either XML or SGML.  A
formal definition of a usage profile as SGML (not that far
away from XML rules) would be a better fit for most of the
things such as omitted closing tags in the early-days stated
rationale for HTM5 than a formal definition as XML.

(Likewise profiled usage of LaTeX can be modeled better with
an SGML document type than with an XML document type, at least
in regard to initial parsing -- after which it's rather trivial
to transform to a closely similar XML document type).

Yes, there are no schemas for SGML document types, but
(a) the difference between schemas and dtds, while rather
important for e-data applications of XML, is not very important
for journal article applications of XML, and (b) even so there
can well be other things that need checking beyond schema limits
and in the SGML world there are standard ways of going about that.

>>      In this connection I'd like to see someone with young
>>      eyes pick up the ball and bring openSP up-to-speed with
>>      the astral planes.
...
> I haven't used opensp for decades but I thought there was a
> patch back then to work with the higher planes. perhaps my
> memory is failing.

I looked into it about three years ago and was told no.  Meanwhile
all major browsers and even the Gnome terminal window can render
U+1D504 presented as UTF-8.

It could just happen that all of the folk scrambling to
solve the world's problems with markdown will re-discover
things like omittag and sdata for in-house use.  Think, for
example, about how to get from LaTeX's "tabular" and "array"
(using LaTeX's "&" and "\\") into SGML; it's much easier
with omittag available.

                              -- Bill
Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 01:44:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:46 UTC