Minutes: MathML Full meeting 22 Feb, 2024

<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=5.7.0#cp-md-0-attendees->
Attendees:

   - Neil Soiffer
   - Greg Williams
   - Louis Maher
   - David Carlisle
   - David Farmer
   - Bert Bos
   - Murray Sargent
   - Moritz Schubotz
   - Dennis Müller
   - Bruce Miller
   - Cary Supalo
   - Patrick Ion
   - Paul Libbrecht
   - Deyan Ginev

<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=5.7.0#cp-md-0-regrets>
Regrets
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=5.7.0#cp-md-0-agenda>
Agenda
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=5.7.0#cp-md-0-1-announcements-updates-progress-reports>1.
Announcements/Updates/Progress reports

DG discussed issue 10143 <https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/10143>
entitled: "Improve DX of element reference attributes by allowing relative
references instead of only ids".

MuS is in contact with Ronald Tse who has created Plurimath
<https://github.com/plurimath>. The main project web page is (
https://www.plurimath.org/). This application converts between multiple
math representation languages. Perhaps this could be the third
implementation of intent. He has recently added Unicode Math to his list of
formats. MuS encouraged the developer to contact NS so that the developer
might add intent to his list of output formats.

MuS thinks the developer would be a good member of the Math WG group. He
would have to be brought in as an invited expert.

BB said there was no limit to the number of invited experts on a working
group.
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=5.7.0#cp-md-0-2-chemistry-discussion-greg-williams-co-chair-w3c-chemistry-community-group-will-join-the-call-for-part-2-of-the-conversation-for-potential-reference->2.
Chemistry discussion. Greg Williams (co-chair W3C Chemistry Community
Group) will join the call for part 2 of the conversation. For potential
reference,

Deyan's Chemistry list
<https://gist.github.com/dginev/ff7e6e090b79a0389fc2eff2b9961331>

Here is the link to the Google sheet from the CCWG:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1h-8k_bwQ1bO7gusb0O2DfcEs0DZUAo6QVGYZuVjWVB8/edit#gid=0

NS: We finished talking about Lewis diagrams.

NS looked at pictures of Lewis diagrams of 2D structures based upon tables.
They were not aligned correctly. This could have been the fault of the
drawing tool.

GW looked at the MathML link that NS sent him.

NS: There's 2 things about intent. One is there's what's we call a concept
name which has a function like syntax. So, there's a concept name and then
arguments to it. You can speak the concept name. It could be an infix or
prefix speech or functional speech. And the other thing is that you could
give it a property and these both can be mixed.

NS: The property is something that is inherited. It gives the AT
information about what it should do but doesn't tell the AT what it must do.

NS: You could give a table the property that it is a system of equations;
therefore, reading the columns is not important. If the table had the
property of being a matrix, then reading the columns would matter.

NS: If something had a chemical formula property, then the AT would know to
use chemical terms as opposed to say math terms.

GW: If we had a table with a Lewis structure property, the AT would know
what symbols should be used for the dots. If something falls between atoms,
the AT knows to treat them as bonds.

NS: We will have to write a few paragraphs on how to speak entities with
Lewis Structure properties. We should have some documentation on a
suggested pattern of speech.

DG: You should not say that properties are inherited. You should say that
properties are visible to the children.

Start in DG's list with the "chemistry, physics" section.

NS: If we have a "chemical formula" property, should we have concepts for
these arrows?

NS: Yes.

DG: How do we know that everyone is thinking of the same characteristics
when we talk about the "chemical formula" property?

NS: Should the arrows be under math or chemistry or in the not-math and
not-chemistry section? How should we organize them?

*ACTION* NS will add a section for chemistry in the concepts list.

NS: says that if someone provides an intent, it can override any properties
that are there.

NS: GW we need a concept name for the arrows, and the other chemistry
symbols.

NS: There are 8 types of arrow symbols in chemistry.

From Deyan Ginev to Everyone: 8 types of arrows article:
https://www.masterorganicchemistry.com/2011/02/09/the-8-types-of-arrows-in-organic-chemistry-explained/

In this article, there are figures demonstrating some of the arrow symbols
discussed in this article.

From the article: To my knowledge there are 8 different types of arrows you
meet in organic chemistry. Here’s a little guide to them.

   - The forward arrow, otherwise known as the “reaction arrow”. NS: Call
   it yields.
   - The Equilibrium arrow. This shows a reaction that is reversible,
   usually in the context where the reversibility is being highlighted (such
   as in a reaction mechanism). NS Call it Equilibrium dash right and
   equilibrium dash left.
   - The Resonance arrow. Not to be confused with the equilibrium arrow,
   this double-headed arrow shows two (or more) species that are resonance
   structures of each other.
   - The Dashed Arrow. This is often used to show a speculative or
   theoretical transformation, where conditions might have yet to be
   discovered.
   - The Curved Arrow (double headed).
   - The Curved Arrow (single headed).
   - The Broken Arrow. This is used to show reactions that don’t work.
   - The Retrosynthesis Arrow. The open arrow here doesn’t actually show a
   “reaction”, per se, but instead more of a mental exercise. The
   retrosynthetic arrow is meant to depict the process of breaking down a
   complex molecule to simpler starting materials. This is useful as a
   planning device to highlight a key strategy used for building a molecule.

NS found a single right arrow with an X through it. He was going to call it
"not-yields". Perhaps it is symbol seven (The Broken Arrow). This is used
to show reactions that don’t work).

DG suggested calling this "unsuccessful-reaction".

NS said there were three equilibrium arrows.

NS: The arrows did not make it into Unicode.

MuS: https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2023/23193r2-ten-chemical-symbols.pdf is a
Unicode chemistry arrow proposal.

NS: Other arrows were weird versions of equilibrium. we can ignore them.

NS: Should we name other arrows?

GW: Those should be just about all the ones that you're going to encounter
between reactants and some product.

NS: Let us consider: aqueous (aq) solid (s) liquid (l) and gas (g).

NS: They could have their own names as shown above. They are often done in
parentheses after the molecule.

NS: I've seen them used as subscripts without the parentheses.

GW: If you see (aq, s, l, g) in parentheses, then these terms refer to the
formula that proceeds the parentheses.

NS: It is a postfix concept with one argument.

NS: You would read the formula then pronounce the aq, s, l, or g.

NS: It is a concept that is attached to an mrow or an msub for a subscript.

From Deyan Ginev to Everyone: (aq)

NS: say h2o (l) for liquid. or (h2o) subscript l which is less common.

GW: There is a down arrow for precipitation out.

NS: Isotopes can use standard superscripts.

NS: You can have pre-subscripts and superscripts or maybe both.

NS: Isotope is a perfectly good name.

NS: We have ions. Call them ions with a superscript to show the charge on
the ion.

NS accepted the name oxidation-state.

Ns accepted proton, anti-proton, electron, positron, and neutron. They can
be treated as an element. They could have the chemical-element property.

DG: said the anti-proton symbol is p bar.

GW Alpha, beta, and gamma are nuclear decay products.

NS: Do they have sub and superscripts?

WG: Well, if you're just doing algebra they are alpha beta and gamma unless
you are breaking down what they actually are.

WG: You can treat alpha, beta and gamma as elements.

From Patrick D F Ion to Everyone: Or \mu as muon etc.

NS Accepted Avogadro's-number.

From Patrick D F Ion to Everyone: Should it actually be Avogadro number
since the possessive should have an apostrophe? [not Loschmidt in any case]

NS: Molar-mass is cap M. It can be a number in a square bracket for
concentration of.

NS: Numbers in square brackets are concentrations.

NS: Is concentration the same as molar-mass?

NS: Molar is a unit.

Copilot Pro <https://copilot.microsoft.com/>: In chemistry, “molar” refers
to the unit of concentration called molarity, which is the number of moles
of a solute per liter of solution.

GW: Think about how it should be said.

NS: M is used as a functional form which is molar mass. It takes one
argument which is the chemical formula. Molar-mass is the name for it.

PI: You must include the molar-mass constant.

Copilot Pro: There is a molar-mass constant, denoted as ( M sub u ). It is
defined as one twelfth of the molar mass of carbon-12, which is
approximately ( M sub u = \frac{M(^{12}C)}{12} ). The molar mass of any
element or compound is its relative atomic mass (atomic weight) multiplied
by the molar mass constant.

Ns: M sub u is a constant. It does not need a concept name.

NS: Hydrate is indicated with a dot.

DG: You have a chemical compound or molecule and then you say the center
dot and then you usually would say something like 5 H2O. The center dot is
there to say the hydrate is starting.

NS: Does it have arguments? Does it stand on its own?

GW: Well, it does have so it's a connector so you're going to have a
chemical formula dot and then H2O preceded by some number prefix typically.
So, the way you would say it would be something like copper sulfate, hexa
hydrate or penta hydrate or something like that is the way you would name
that compound.

NS: prefixes (penta, etc) are listed in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrate

NS: But would you say it as the compound name like CH 3 something,
something, hydrate?

NS: It would take the 2 arguments, the number and the chemical formula and
Hydrate would be spoken at the end, so it would be post fix. It's 2
arguments in a post fix reading.

GW: If you had copper sulfate hexahydrate, that's going to be written as
CU, S, o, Subscript 4.

GW: There are some instances where you would want it read as copper sulfate
hexahydrate, but you know in a lot of instances you're probably just going
to want to read it out as a formula depending upon what the context is.

NS: Okay, so do we have any conclusions on what this should be as a concept
name?

GW: It's 3 arguments. The first argument is going to be your left-hand side
chemical formula, then on the right, you've got an argument that's made up
of a number followed by H 2 O.

NS: So that's probably 3 arguments because it is important to say the
number, to say the di or Penta.

DG: But you don't need the H2O, so you are Down to 2 again.

PI: And you also have an anomalous case of methyl hydrate, which is
methanol.

GW: Technically that would be true. I mean, the H2O Is implied if it's a
hydrate, and I don't know of it being used for anything else on the
right-hand side.

PI: Is it actually necessary to have a hydrate concept?

NS: What do you mean by is it necessary? Do you mean should it be in core?

PI: I mean, obviously it's important enough that people keep referring to
compounds and their hydrated forms and that's useful if describing
something in crystals and so on. But, it's a rather complicated thing to
set up.

GW: The dot is context dependent. there must be a property or concept
saying this is a hydrate dot.

CS: Leave it up to the user to know that it is hexa-hydrate, pentahydrate,
and all that.

CS: I don't know if we need the MathML AT to say hydrate.

GW: We need to give the dot a property of hydrate.

NS: I may be confused again, but if you're saying that we just Label the
dot with hydrate, the AT is going to speak the formula, say hydrate, and
speak what follows it, whereas it sounds like you want to silence any water
that follows it.

WG: The issue is that we want to give the AT flexibility to choose how to
read it, right?

NS: It sounds like you're saying we just put hydrate on it, and it's
pronounced dot

GW: If they want to alter that and give it as a compound name plus
pentahydrate then they can choose to do so. But you label it so that people
know what the dot is for. We do not force speech rules.

DG: You can figure out the details later if you like, but they think
hydrate is necessary. It was part of the core curriculum in my high school.

NS: At least as a Resolution for now, we have hydrate and it applies only
to the dot, and it takes no arguments.

NS: Yet, if the AT wants to pronounce it, the AT can notice that yes, look,
there's a hydrate inside here and so I really want to say hydrate instead
of dot something or other.

GW: The dot would be red in the order it happens.

GW, and CS, can come next week.

We will continue to go through DG's list. If we finish that, we will start
on GW's list.

In DG's list, we will start on row 18 of the section entitled " chemistry,
physics".