Subject: Re: XS: Ports --> math From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 26 May 1997 10:16:39 +0100 (BST) |
> Math in SGML has been so difficult for such a long time that I suspect > you are one of a rare few who have legacy to worry about. As I recall, possibly true. > even Arbortext uses TeX as their "native" equation format. Once MathML > becomes "real" it will probably be the dominant math DTD format. So the > question becomes: are the others worth worrying about? Which one are you dangerous attitude. you could apply it to tables as well, perhaps. i really think its not safe to imply `we have sorted math; we fully understand the structures, and we can put all their problems into specialized addons which support The One True Math DTD' - it is after quite contrary to the whole point of XML! > using, and how large is your legacy base? we use our own math DTD. hard to quantify the size of _math_ legacy, but we do publish ?1400 scientific journals, of which nearly all are now in SGML. i just ran an analysis on the working database at one site (here in Oxford) and found about 24000 articles. if 25% use math of some kind, its quite lot of < and > ... > Could MathML meet your needs > if there were an easy way to convert your data? If not, could it be > fixed so that it did meet your needs? probably. i havent done the detailed comparison. if Procrustean is the order of the day, so be it. but a pity. sebastian DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XS: Ports --> math, Paul Prescod | Thread | Re: XS: Ports --> math, Paul Prescod |
Re: XS: Ports --> math, Sebastian Rahtz | Date | Re: XS: needed features?, Sebastian Rahtz |
Month |