For the purpose of presentation math, LaTex substrings get my vote.
the problem with LaTeX math is that it is quite unfamiliar to a lot of
people, whereas most people involved in CellML probably have a
reasonable grasp of at least content MathML if not presentation MathML
also. The conversion from content to presentation is quite
straightforward using the W3C provided XSLT's.
They are simple to express and their diffs in my opinion are easier
to interpret than diffs of MathML/XML.
Not sure I see how - there are many ways to lay out the same equation in
LaTeX, especially if you are using one of the WYSIWYG editors, and even
more so if you are using a different WYSIWYG editor from the last person
to edit the document, so I wouldn't expect the diffs to be any better
than MathML/XML diffs. In either case things can be improved by imposing
certain style rules - much like Andrew suggested in another part of this
thread...
In terms of diffs, are there not plenty of tools around that provide XML
diff's based on the underlying content of a document rather than a
simple text file diff? That would seem a more appropriate way to go to me.
More generally, I think XML source formats should be avoided if
possible.
Just wondering if you can explain your reasoning for this?
Andre.
___
cellml-discussion mailing list
cellml-discussion@cellml.org
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion
