From: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:00:51 +0200

Message-ID: <539A1503.10501@free.fr>

To: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:00:51 +0200

Message-ID: <539A1503.10501@free.fr>

To: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>

Le 12/06/2014 22:59, Frédéric WANG a écrit : > Le 12/06/2014 22:48, Davide P. Cervone a écrit : >> Why wouldn't you just use displaystyle="true" on the <mtable> itself >> rather than wrapping it in an <mstyle>, or (worse yet) adding <mstyle >> displaystyle="true"> in each <mtd>? > Yes, I was mislead by what LaTeXML does, displaystyle="true" on the > <mtable> is enough. MathJax builds an internal tree before > reconverting it to MathML while itex2MML directly builds the output > string without any abstract structure. This makes it faster but then > it's a bit harder to apply the displaystyle="true" to <mtable> and > potential other nested <mtable> descendants. >> I don't think it should be necessary to change the spec for this, as >> a simple solution exists (<mtable displaystyle="true"> rather than >> <mstyle displaystyle="true"><mtable>). It does seem that I'm not the >> only one who misunderstood the situation, however. > I think allowing inherited (default) and false / true (explicit > values) would give more flexibility for the cases previously > mentioned. Apparently, Gecko < 29, MathJax and other converters > assumed that displaystyle on <mtable> was inherited, so my main > concern is that following the spec breaks the compatibility. However, > I'm aware that changing the spec is a problem for the Math WG, so I > guess the "simplest" is that all the tools / rendering engines align > on the spec. > -- Frédéric Wang maths-informatique-jeux.com/blog/fredericReceived on Thursday, 12 June 2014 21:01:16 UTC

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