Minutes: MathML Full Meeting, 22 May, 2025

 Attendees:

   - Neil Soiffer
   - Louis Maher
   - David Carlisle
   - Patrick Ion
   - Bruce Miller
   - Murray Sargent
   - Paul Libbrecht
   - Bert Bos
   - Moritz Schubotz
   - Brian Kardell

<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-0-regrets>Regrets
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-0-action-items>action Items
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-0-1-announcements-updates-progress-reports>1.
Announcements/Updates/Progress reports

There will not be a core meeting on Monday, May 26, due to holidays in the
U.S. and England.

*ACTION:* BK will organize a meeting with BB and DC at 10 AM Eastern
Daylight Time on Friday, May 23, 2025, to review the draft that will be the
TR.
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-0-2-a-href-https-github-com-w3c-mathml-issues-247-247-spec-should-specify-what-char-to-use-for-accents-lines-a->2.
#247: Spec should specify what char to use for accents/lines
<https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/247>

*ACTION:* Everyone with an opinion should add a comment to issue #247: Spec
should specify what char to use for accents/lines
<https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/247>
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-0-agenda>Agenda
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-1-1-announcements-updates-progress-reports>1.
Announcements/Updates/Progress reports

There will not be a core meeting on Monday, May 26, due to holidays in the
U.S. and England.

BK: We want to move into TR space, and to move forward to the CR.

BB is writing the transition request.

BK: We should update what is in TR. BK wants to get on a call and talk
through it.

*ACTION:* BK will organize a meeting with BB and DC at 10 AM Eastern
Daylight Time on Friday, May 23, 2025, to review the draft that will be the
TR.

DC: As of a week ago, Microsoft's default Word version can output PDF
documents, containing mathematics, generated with the Microsoft equation
editor, in MathML. Acrobat, using MathCAT, can read the math in these PDF
documents.

NS discussed the effort, being led by Richard Orem (rorme@daisy.org) and
Brian Richwine (brichwin@iu.edu) to improve the Microsoft equation
editor: GitHub
- daisy/math-a11y <https://github.com/daisy/math-a11y/>.

PL, and MoS: Is Microsoft working on a method to enter intent into
Microsoft word?

DC discussed adding intents using LaTeX.

MoS: In some cases, people submitting information to Wikipedia can specify
intents. Our approach was really ad hoc. We would just demonstrate that
intense can be put onto the tree using LaTeX macros.

LM: The April release of JAWS uses MathCAT to provide both Nemeth and UEB
support for mathematics in English.
<https://cryptpad.fr/#cp-md-1-2-a-href-https-github-com-w3c-mathml-issues-247-247-spec-should-specify-what-char-to-use-for-accents-lines-a->2.
#247: Spec should specify what char to use for accents/lines
<https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/247>

In 2020, DC wrote: TeX has a number of commands that correspond to
mover/munder accents in MathML. The spec does not say what character to use
for those accents. In some cases there are ASCII chars that could be used
but also non-ASCII ones that are similar. Many of these characters should
be stretchy when used with mover/munder. At a minimum, the spec should say
which (or all) of the following should be used for (stretchable) accents
(some options listed) so that renderers and generators of MathML agree on
what character(s) to use:

   - \hat -- '^', U+0302, U+02C6
   - \check -- 'v', U+0306, U+02D8
   - \tilde -- '~', U+0303, U+223C, U+02DC
   - \acute -- U+0027, U+00B4, U+02CA, U+0301, U+02B9, U+2032
   - \grave -- U+0060, U+02BC, U+02CB, U+0300
   - \dot -- '.', U+00B7, U+02D9, U+0307, and potentially others like U+2E33
   - \dot -- '..', U+00A8, U+0308
   - \breve -- U+02D8, U+0306
   - \bar -- '_', '-', U+00AF, U+02C9, U+0304, U+0305, U+0332, U+FF3F
   - vec -- U+20D7, U+2192, U+27F6 list end Note: based on experience with
   MathPlayer, many of these alternatives were encountered "in the wild" so it
   is important that Core specifies these (MathML 3 should have) as people
   have to guess what character to use. list of 2 items
   - \overline -- should be same as \bar
   - \underline -- same as \bar? list end

NS: Which one should be used for accent marks?

NS: I have no idea which one should be used, and I think it may well be
implementation-dependent as to what everything does.

NS: I think that Fred said it is not a spec issue but a font issue.

MuS: When it comes to a hat or tilde, It is good to support the ASCII
versions. There are many accents that do not have ascii equivalents so you
must use Unicode combining marks.

NS: Using combining characters works if it's just a single character, but
doesn't work when you have an expression. I don't know if you'd ever put a
double dot over an expression, but you'd certainly put lines and hats.

NS: Bug reporter said that the arrow is a problem because it does not look
right.

NS: You have different characters to use depending on what the base is.

MuS: Many characters can be stretched.

BM: Personally, I think it's a really, really, really bad idea to be using
combining characters for these accents.

NS: We need to push core or full to say something about this.

BM: Through our discussions, we see that this is a real problem.

NS: For now, we do not have an answer for selecting the correct characters
to use.

DC: Well, I think that the table ought to be clarified: at the font level,
you use the combining one, and on input, you can use either, which means,
it's the browser's job to do that transformation.

PI: I was objecting that there's neither a mapping nor an equivalence. It's
a statement that these characters have associated with them glyphs which
are similar looking, and as you've been saying, in a font connection, it's
you might tend towards one, and in an input connection, because that's the
way your keyboard is, you might end up with another when you intend to have
one or one or the other. And I'm in sympathy with what Bruce said that,
very much that we should choose some method that's dominant.

DC: No, I think the spec ought to say you can use either of these.

NS: We have to get the browser people to go along with whatever answer we
choose. We must demonstrate that the present situation is bad.

DC: The spec does not really tell you anything at all does it?

PI: It seems that, in fact, it would be better if you knew the intent When
you produce the character.

PL: Our discussion has demonstrated to us that we must do something.

*ACTION:* Everyone with an opinion should add a comment to issue #247: Spec
should specify what char to use for accents/lines
<https://github.com/w3c/mathml/issues/247>

NS: Okay, so we'll start with the roundtable next week. Obviously, the
discussion we had today, and the previous one about Intents and LaTeX is
something people care about, so maybe we'll pick up on that. But we should
cover other issues that aren't the spec writing and polyfills.