Chris Rowley writes: > Only in the "real soon now" world; I would say that, even with the > mega-bucks behind it, it still needs to be `real-world tested'. > an awful lot of people have their shirts on XML. its extremely widely deployed. are you still waiting for Java to be real-world tested too? some people are still waiting for everything except FORTRAN to be real-world tested. > MathML and Sebastian's ideas of semantic mark-up 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 well-understood (they are more like > the relationship of natural language to the real world than like the fine. you carry on with presentation mathml. no-one 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