Minutes: MathML Full meeting 20 June, 2024

 Attendees:

   - Neil Soiffer
   - Louis Maher
   - David Carlisle
   - Murray Sargent
   - Deyan Ginev
   - Paul Libbrecht
   - Moritz Schubotz

<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=2024.3.1#cp-md-0-regrets>
Regrets

   - Bruce Miller
   - David Farmer
   - Patrick Ion

<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=2024.3.1#cp-md-0-action-items>Action
Items

The June core meeting will be held on Thursday, June 27, 2024, at our
regular time. This meeting will be a combined core and intent meeting. The
total meeting time will be one hour.

*ACTION* DC: will open an issue on Extensions to the markup for the Open
concept list <https://w3c.github.io/mathml-docs/intent-open-concepts/>

*Resolution:* Currencies will not go into core, but they can go into the
open list with full pronunciation. Close issue 490 include standardized
currencies in core intents <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/490>

*ACTION* NS: This may be more appropriately handled at the core meeting,
but I think this confusion/differences about MathML Core and MathML full
<https://github.com/arnog/mathlive/issues/2367#issuecomment-2179658588> is
relevant.

*ACTION:* PL will write down his proposals for what we should do for the
four derivative cases:
( Leibniz: dy divided by dx Lagrange: f prime, x 3. Euler: cap df times x
and 4. Newton: y dot ); then, perhaps we can make a final resolution for issue
473 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/473>

*ACTION* NS: I compared the MathPlayer inferences that could be core
concept names issue 476 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/476> with the
core concept as of 19/6/2024. Continue considering the things that are
missing from the core concept list.
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=2024.3.1#cp-md-0-agenda>
Agenda
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=2024.3.1#cp-md-0-1-announcements-updates-progress-reports>1.
Announcements/Updates/Progress reports

The June core meeting will be held on Thursday, June 27, 2024, at our
regular time. This meeting will be a combined core and intent meeting. The
total meeting time will be one hour.

   - Open concept list update
   <https://w3c.github.io/mathml-docs/intent-open-concepts/>

DC: Most of the work on the open list is DG's work.

DC converted the notation hints into intents. There are 1013 entries in
this table.

DC: There are still some unresolved issues with this list like derivatives.

DC: You can see the math rendering; and, if you hover over them, you can
see the source code.

NS to DG: With a list this large, do you expect people to submit fixes?

DG: Yes. There are technical issues of how this is to be done. They will
also submit new notations.

DG: The reason why there are strange mistakes here is that this table is my
automated work.

DG: There was a tool I wrote in 2009 or so the generated most of this list
from crawling these resources.

DC would like to compact and correct the list through some kind of template.

PL: This looks good. We should not spend too much time on this because it
will never be complete, and people will have different semantic views on
how things should be shown.

*ACTION*DC: will open an issue on Extensions to the markup for the Open
concept list <https://w3c.github.io/mathml-docs/intent-open-concepts/>

   - Large Op update #482 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/482>

No updates.

   - include standardized currencies in core intents #490 -- further
   discussion? <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/490>

PL: Take the symbols and pronunciations from the Unicode standard. The
pronunciations are only hints, they are not required. The currency symbols
are not part of core.

NS: Leave the speaking order to intent.

DG: Can we put currencies, which do not have Unicode symbols, in the open
list? You need an intent value to market these items as currency.

PL: It is good to put things which are not in Unicode into the open list.

MuS: Perhaps we should ask that such currencies be put in the Unicode list
of symbols?

NS: Currencies without Unicode symbols can go into the open list. We could
put them in a separate table at the top of the open list. We could put
currencies described by more than one letter in this list.

*Resolution:* Currencies will not go into core, but they can go into the
open list with full pronunciation. Close issue 490 include standardized
currencies in core intents <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/490>

DG: The dollar sign is used for purposes other than currency. We use them
as variable indicators in our templates.

   - Confusion/differences about MathML Core and MathML full
   <https://github.com/arnog/mathlive/issues/2367#issuecomment-2179658588>

NS: What are we generating when we write MathML? Are we using core or full
MathML?

NS: Since menclose is not in core, should we implement it to be in
conformance with MathML 4?

DC: I did not do long division. It is not in core.

NS: There are four differences between MathML 4 and MathML 3.

NS: Two of them are not really implemented anywhere, and they are the
elementary operators, and line breaking.

NS believes that MathJax has implemented line breaking.

NS: The third difference is menclose which is a proposed level two addition.

NS: The fourth difference is MathML CSS support which is not supported in
Safari and Firefox.

NS: Menclose is the really important difference, and we should push to have
it supported in chrome.

NS: We have an upcoming core meeting (June 27, 1PM EDT), and perhaps we can
discuss these issues then.

DG: A new thought/opportunity when polyfilling is that similarly to how CSS
support allows to polyfill various visual attributes (e.g., for menclose),
having an intent attribute allows us to polyfill the accessibility
information (e.g., we can adapt the menclose attributes as intent
expressions).

*ACTION* NS: This may be more appropriately handled at the core meeting,
but I think this confusion/differences about MathML Core and MathML full
<https://github.com/arnog/mathlive/issues/2367#issuecomment-2179658588> is
relevant.
<https://sandbox.cryptpad.info/code/inner.html?ver=2024.3.1#cp-md-0-2-intent-issues-that-need-more-discussion-to-resolve->2.
Intent issues that need more discussion to resolve:

   - core concepts: how should the multiple forms of differentiation be
   handled? #473 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/473>

NS: DG came up with a very interesting video talking about why the
notations are wrong.

NS: I think that' in some sense, the, at least at the moment, the ship has
sailed on what notations people use.

NS: I don't think, unless somebody wants to push back on that, we need to
consider potentially other notations.

NS: No push back, okay. So, there are 4 main notations. The main issue is
we have a bunch of different notations which potentially are spoken
differently that represent the same semantics. Should there be one concept
name or multiple concept names, and whether properties should be used to
distinguish between them.

PL: It is ok to have new notations. Put them on the open list and
eventually move them to the core list. The process will never be complete.
The only thing we have to find out is how to present the notations in a
clean way.

MuS showed the group his approach to showing the derivatives.

There was a discussion on how MuS used properties.

NS: The order of arguments does not have to be the order of speech.

MuS: I really would like to have the order 1st because that is, in the
languages that I know, that's the way you say it.

MuS: There is a real trade-off. If you're speaking a whole equation, I
think it's nice to have it sound the way you'd like to speak it. Whereas if
you're going through character by character, you want to know exactly
what's on the screen.

DG: I am being empathetic here because I think it's a very valid question
that you're asking, and you can see it in both ways depending on which hat
you have on because indeed it's so much markup almost to put it on every
single derivative. What are these 25 characters to carry? But maybe you
only need to put it in cases where you want to make the pedagogical point.
So, the case for the property is Really, it's an optional secondary piece
of information that you will only use when it's important and you market
with the simplest shortest thing and move on.

NS: I think that We really need to say something. I think that we need an
intent for at least the Leibniz notation, and the other ones are maybe a
little different. I mean you would still say, for the higher derivatives,
it is still like squared and cubed, like d squared or d cubed. Yet, that is
wrong, because they are not powers.

MuS: You would say second derivative.

NS: No resolution yet.

From Deyan Ginev to everyone: the K12 notation is Lagrange though ... not
Leibnitz

*ACTION:* PL will write down his proposals for what we should do for the
four derivative cases:
( Leibniz: dy divided by dx Lagrange: f prime, x 3. Euler: cap df times x
and 4. Newton: y dot ); then, perhaps we can make a final resolution for issue
473 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/473>

   - MathPlayer inferences that could be core concept names #476
   <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/476>

NS: I compared the above list with the core concept as of 19/6/2024 and
this is what is missing (not counting the open issues around derivatives):

Probability and statistics All statistics except mean and one form of
conditional-probability.

Geometry

   - Measure-of-angle (m∠) -- we have angle-measure (∡)
   - geometric shapes (triangle, circle, ...)
   - Similar (∼)
   - Because (Proof?) (∵)
   - Incongruence (≇)

General Rules

   - modulo (mod, %)
   - wreath-product (mrow ≀)
   - tensor-product (mrow ⊗)
   - things corresponding to menclose notation (circled, phasor-angle, ...)
   - matrix-index (same as indexed-by?)

NS: Are these core concepts?

PL: Mean is already in core.

NS: I think expected value and variance seems pretty core to me. There are
unions and intersections, and the normal distribution.

DC: You can use an intent for xi square distribution. Being in core means
you can give a speech template. Usually, you just read it like expected
value.

DC: If you put intent chi squared distribution the, you just say that.

NS: The geometry symbols should be core.

NS: we will bring this up later.

*ACTION* NS: I compared the MathPlayer inferences that could be core
concept names issue 476 <https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/476> with the
core concept as of 19/6/2024. Continue Considering the things that are
missing from the core concept list.