Re: comments re draft version 2.0

Hello all.

> >                                                          ...  but it's 
> > hard to see what's missing or awkward just by scanning the spec -- it 
> > really takes trying to translate many whole documents from many sources 
> > into the new system, and I don't have the time or motivation to do much
> > of that.
> Indeed.
> In a related list Paul Gartside announced that he had placed the
> Gurari translator from LaTeX/TeX, tex4moz, which should be very useful
> in this regard, on his web site with xml (html-with-mathml) examples
> that are ready for Mozilla.  Just be aware that Mozilla is still alpha.
> See "http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/~gartside/mathzilla/index.html".

Alas, I don't think tex4moz can help much with the *content* markup
review, since I believe it only generates presentation markup.  It
will still be useful in finding problems that might come up with
shortcomings in the presentation markup.  However, the presentation
markup is already much more thoroughly tested that content markup, and
is used in production in a large scale publishing operation (the US
Patent Office).

For large scale testing of content markup, I think we have to look to
computer algebra and possibly OpenMath software, since automated
conversion of legacy material would still require human checking to see
if the meaning has come through correctly.  


Robert Miner                          http://www.webeq.com
Geometry Technologies, Inc.           email: rminer@geomtech.com
                                      phone: 651-223-2884