Bill Page wrote: > Arthur, > > I am very glad that you intend to continue work on your web-based > interface for the Axioms! I think it is great - so far... :-) > > Are there any specific points you could make concerning "what you have > in mind" versus the way the Sage "notebook" works? Have you written > any summary or sketch of what you are working toward? > > Regards, > Bill Page. > Bill,
I'm thinking in terms of authoring mathematical web documents rather than making a CAS interface, which I think is a significantly different perspective, although what I have in mind can function as a CAS interface too. Such an authoring tool should be capable of producing a nice looking document and the reader may not have any interest in interacting with the CAS backend although that should be a possibility. The tool should also be suitable for producing a well documented program. I want to keep track of all commands in a tree structure and allow pruning and hiding of individual cells or whole branches and sub trees as well as rearranging of cells. In addition I want to allow input of math via a tex2mml mechanism for documentation and support for pamphlets. I imagine allowing the user to select different modes of operation, for instance scroll down mode versus stack mode, or showing all cells in the tree versus showing just the ends of the branches. There's also the question of using MathML versus jsMath. I like the MathML option because it seems to interface more naturally with the xml structure of the document and the DOM. Maybe that preference is a matter of taste but I think there's much more to be done with MathML, for instance I want to produce a content MathML package and allow for at least some conversion of MathML expressions into panAxiom commands. In conjunction with the xhtml interface I'm also interested in developing an XUL extension for Firefox. XUL has the advantage of being much more suited to designing a GUI than xhtml. I had a basic XUL extension for sending and displaying commands set up under Firefox 1.5 but it broke under 2.0 and I haven't gotten back to it yet. These are some of my thoughts but as I work on this project more keep coming up. Finally what it really comes down to is that this is way too interesting to drop in favour of somebody else's project unless they totally obviated everything I want to do. I reiterate that it's unlikely one interface is going to be right for everybody. We have the command line with ASCII art, emacs mode, TeXmacs, and William Stein says that it should be possible in the near future to separate the Sage interface from Sage to provide an interface for panAxiom. I'm focussed on the web interface but some people will prefer a traditional desktop application. It looks like there'll be something for everybody. Arthur > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:19 PM, Arthur Ralfs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> After taking a look at the sage web interface I plan to continue with my >> own plans. The sage interface looks very good and well developed but >> is not what I have in mind. >> >> I comment that I think it is unlikely that one interface will be optimal >> for everybody. >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ open-axiom-devel mailing list open-axiom-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-axiom-devel
