2010-07-18 23:20 Professor James Davenport <[email protected]>: > I'm inclined to agree, which is why I prepfer the OM 2 second edition, or > OM 2.1 label. > As a minimum we should mention the MathML encoding. We should give a > pointer to the XSL, and at least say that it is CORRECT, even if not the > only way to do it. > > As I've said, I think it is becoming more important to do DeFMP, and I'd > like tosee (linked in with MathML) some movement on notation files.
It's not up to me do decide that, but these planned enhancements make it rather look like 2.1 than "2.0 2nd edition" to me. Cheers, Christoph -- Christoph Lange, Jacobs Univ. Bremen, http://kwarc.info/clange, Skype duke4701 _______________________________________________ Om mailing list [email protected] http://openmath.org/mailman/listinfo/om
