Chris Rowley writes:
> Only in the "real soon now" world; I would say that, even with the
> megabucks behind it, it still needs to be `realworld tested'.
>
an awful lot of people have their shirts on XML. its extremely widely
deployed. are you still waiting for Java to be realworld tested too?
some people are still waiting for everything except FORTRAN to be
realworld tested.
> MathML and Sebastian's ideas of semantic markup cater very well for
> the ideal of what Physicists and Computer Scientists (ie people who
> designed Mathematica and Maple) think maths and maths notation is.
leaving me out of it, since I have no views, why is your math more
"real" than their math? your view comes over as awfully elitist and
snobbish :}
> level). It's use of notation and its relation to the semantics are
> very complex and probably;y not wellunderstood (they are more like
> the relationship of natural language to the real world than like the
fine. you carry on with presentation mathml. noone forces you to use
content mathml. i dont see any conflict
> of these is the concept of <mrow>; this is a bad name for something
> that Don called a `subformula' but which is very badly handled (both
> syntactically and semantically in `standard TeX/LaTeX'). i shall
presumably you would agree, then, that one possibility is a new LaTeX
(presentation) math markup learning the lessons of MathML?
sebastian
