From: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>

Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 22:33:53 +0100

Message-ID: <541B4FC1.3000709@nag.co.uk>

To: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>

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

Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 22:33:53 +0100

Message-ID: <541B4FC1.3000709@nag.co.uk>

To: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>

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

On 18/09/2014 22:09, Peter Krautzberger wrote: > Thanks, David, for confirming the reading of the spec. > > So to guarantee \displaystyle we're supposed to do something like > > <mstyle scriptlevel="0"> > <mtable displaystyle="true"> > ... > </mtable> > </mstyle> > To guarantee \textstyle something like > > <mstyle displaystyle="true" scriptlevel="0"> > <mtable> > ... > </mtable> > </mstyle> well if an author is coding directly in mathml probably wouldn't have the mstyle. If you're converting from TeX code (that is not using \mathchoice) then you would need that for absolute fidelity, although to be honest often if tex alignments end up being used in a subscript the author _doesn't want the table to stay using large fonts, and ammends the code to use mathchoice so it gets smaller. > > And > > <mfrac> > <mtable displaystyle="true"> > ... > </mtable> > <mrow> > ... > </mrow> > </mfrac> > > would get us a table with displaystyle formatting, but in scriptstyle > size (when used in an inline formula). (I admit I find that somewhat > strange; oh well.) again, if tex did this you probably wouldn't find it strange:-) > > Thanks again for your quick response! > Peter. From the speed you may note that it was a personal response, but I think I only cited what the spec is saying:-) DavidReceived on Thursday, 18 September 2014 21:34:26 UTC

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