> Could we please see some examples of MathML, or is it XML, macros that > might appear in a document? It isn't macros really (although the TeX community tends to call anything that results in some code running somewhere, a macro). However you can put in your document whatever you like, within the constraints of XML syntax. So <SteenrodAlgebra> or &MonsterGroup; or whatever. You can (or rather will be able to) then specify in a style sheet how this is supposed to get transformed to MathML. > I have been reliably informed that XSL does not allow specifications > that are expressive enough to do this job (basically since it knows > nothing about maths, in the sense that it has no concept of arithmetic). If you compare the first draft submission of XSL to the first working draft of XSL 1.0, which came out only a few months later, you will see that they are essentially completely different languages. XSL is a rapidly moving target, and currently it is moving behind the closed doors of W3C working group processes, so there is not a lot of point worrying now about any particular lack of features. You just have to have faith that it will be alright on the day. If by chance it is not alright on the day, you will be able to do the transformation in a lower level language, such as java or ecmascript interfacing through the DOM. (You can't do this either at the moment as there are no math formating objects that you can transform to, but the public document does say these will be added in a later draft). Most TeX users will never want to author in XML, however there are many advantages in authoring in tex and transforming to XML (even if eventually the document is printed by transforming back to tex). It gives a mechanism for consistency checking and communicating with the wider non-tex world, that is simply not available in an all-tex solution. David