Note: PDUTR #25 is a proposed draft Unicode Technical Report at http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr25/. The part under discussion is Section 5.
>That's debatable, and the community around a language called >"mathematics" is just heading in the exact opposite direction for good >reasons, The community is? Last time I checked, most of the community still used TeX and the like, and has yet to hear about PDUTR #25 or probably even Unicode. >getting 90% of what they need into plaintext, which will >for the foreseeable future remain the only common denominator data >format that can transcent individual applications well. Last time I looked at Mathematica, I could export TeX, but I couldn't export a Unicode text file. PDUTR #25 is not supported by anything yet, and there's no evidence that it's any easier to export to PDUTR #25 than MathML. PDUTR #25 is almost impossible to import currently - I don't see why a system that inputs it would find it much easier to output PDUTR #25 format rather than MathML. >Otherwise, all markup languages would need the exact same language >tagging (we had that already with character sets, remember? that's how >we got to Unicode ...). How much text will be language tagged, and how much text will be mistagged? 98% of tagging is going to be automatic, by the locale, and some portion of that is going to be wrong, because the author doesn't care or know enough to fix it. >Plaintext remains a far more powerful concept and XML is >mostly a markup mechanism designed to overcome deficiencies in ASCII >that appears rather clumsy in a pure Unicode plaintext world. Show me that Unicode is any less clumsy. For one thing, it requires massive redesign of the keyboard/input-system to work, it won't display over archaic terminals and systems, and all the tagging won't work on any current system. -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
