>> - At the moment, CellML doesn't explicitly support the rem element
>> (remainder function in MathML), even though CellML does allow its use (at
>> the risk of ending in a situation where a model may work fine in a given
>> CellML tool -- that supports the rem element --, but not in a nother -- t
Alan Garny wrote:
>> At the break-away session on the versioning strategy for CellML (which
>> followed the Auckland CellML meeting today) we discussed the future of
>> how we would version CellML, including whether we would put all elements
>> for the next version of CellML in a completely differe
Matt Halstead wrote:
>> Otherwise, Matt wrote:
>>
>>
>>> ... You might want to scan a document to see what
>>> "versions" the model conforms up to, but one of the nice things about
>>> pushing these new elements/attributes into new namespaces is that you
>>> can still treat a model as say 1.1
> Otherwise, Matt wrote:
>
> > ... You might want to scan a document to see what
> > "versions" the model conforms up to, but one of the nice things about
> > pushing these new elements/attributes into new namespaces is that you
> > can still treat a model as say 1.1 even if it contains 1.2 element
> At the break-away session on the versioning strategy for CellML (which
> followed the Auckland CellML meeting today) we discussed the future of
> how we would version CellML, including whether we would put all elements
> for the next version of CellML in a completely different namespace, or
> onl
On 9/19/07, Andrew Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Halstead wrote:
> > "Andrew was opposed to the idea of changing all the namespaces, and
> > suggested changing the namespace of a particular element in only some
> > circumstances:"
> >
> > I agree very strongly with this. It would make wr
Matt Halstead wrote:
> "Andrew was opposed to the idea of changing all the namespaces, and
> suggested changing the namespace of a particular element in only some
> circumstances:"
>
> I agree very strongly with this. It would make writing out xpath
> expressions simpler since you know absolutely w
