- From: Frédéric WANG <fred.wang@free.fr>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 09:09:53 +0200
- To: Stephen Watt <smwatt@gmail.com>
- Cc: "www-math@w3.org" <www-math@w3.org>
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2016 07:10:29 UTC
Le 26/07/2016 à 00:00, Stephen Watt a écrit : > I see your point, but have to say that I am not really satisfied with > the current spec language regarding equivalence. Mfenced can also > give information about grouping that is lost with the mrow > formulation, e.g. an mrow containining [a, b [ f ] d, e] may be a > list of three things or a pair of half open intervals with an f in the > middle. So the only thing you are saying is that expanding to plain text without explicit grouping implies loss of information compared to using mfenced. That's true, but that's not my point. If you really follow the expansion rules in MathML3 instead of using plain text then you see that nothing is lost in your example and that the mfenced element is again useless. Certainly, one can write <mo>+<mrow> without proper grouping as that's unfortunately often the case for markup generated from text representation like TeX or ASCII. But the existence of an mfenced element in MathML does not magically force converters or people to do this grouping.
Received on Tuesday, 26 July 2016 07:10:29 UTC