[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Comments on MathML Last Call Draft (cont'd)




Thanks again for your detailed comments!

> It may be better to mention exact keyword color names.

I am inclined to agree.

> "Note that the color name keywords are not case-sensitive, unlike most 
> keywords in MathML attribute values."

> Is mention of this really significant?

I think so. It means that GREEN is allowed, even if the list of colours
that you suggest above that we make explicit only says green.

> 7.2.1 ... It may be clearer if written as

Yes, probably true.

> A.1 ... Thus, the DTD itself and documents based on it do not
> validate.

Sorry about that, could you try the DTD update available from
http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD

> Are all references "non-normative"?
Currently yes. I agree some of them probably ought to be normative.


> 1. CSS1 revision (revised 11 Jan 1999) could be mentioned. 
> 2. Perhaps, reference to CSS2 (as an alternate to 1.) could be mentioned, if 
> Math WG decides to base MathML on it.

Yes at least 1. I don't think we use any css2 features, but having a
reference anyway wouldn't hurt of course.


David


References: