Let me go on a bit of a rampage about TeX for a bit.
TeX is not a markup format. It is an executable code format. It is a
programming language by design! (It's a very poor programming language, but
let's ignore that for the moment.) You run a TeX program to generate the
rendered output. This has
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.orgwrote:
wrote my thesis which also include a lot of semantics and type theory in
FrameMaker, which was actually pretty good but is very dead.
Correction: it's alive! Amazing.
Rob
--
q“qIqfq qyqoquq qlqoqvqeq qtqhqoqsqeq
On Monday, 6 May 2013 07:27:41 UTC+2, p.kraut...@gmail.com wrote:
Microsoft indeed remains a mystery.
Not so much when it comes to Microsoft Office:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/murrays/
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
On 05/06/2013 05:46 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
Let me just reply to a few points to keep this conversation manageable:
2013/5/5 p.krautzber...@gmail.com
Here are a couple of reasons why dropping MathML would be a bad idea.
(While I wrote this others made some of the points as well.)
* MathML is
Thanks Peter: that point-for-point format makes it easier for me to
understand your perspective on the issues that I raised.
2013/5/6 p.krautzber...@gmail.com
Benoit, you said you need proof that MathML is better than TeX. I think
it's the reverse at this point (from a web perspective --
2013/5/6 Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
Let me go on a bit of a rampage about TeX for a bit.
TeX is not a markup format. It is an executable code format. It is a
programming language by design!
Yes, but a small subset of TeX could be purely a markup format, not a
programming
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 07:27:08AM -0400, Benoit Jacob wrote:
2013/5/6 Robert O'Callahan rob...@ocallahan.org
We expose HTML and SVG content to Web applications by structuring that
content as a tree and then exposing it using standard DOM APIs. These APIs
let you examine, manipulate,
On 5/6/13 7:27 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
I guess I don't see the usefulness of allowing to apply style to individual
parts of an equation
Styling parts of an equation with different colors can be _extremely_
useful for readability. It's rarely done in print, of course, and I
assume there are
On 5/6/2013 6:27 AM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
I guess I don't see the usefulness of allowing to apply style to individual
parts of an equation --- applying a single style to an entire equation
would be plenty enough as far as I can see.
Suppose you were writing an introductory explanation course,
I don't have time to respond right now, but regarding the accessibility,
mathematics is also more complex in that case too. Basically the two use cases
are I'm aware of are
- For blind people or other visual disabilities, speech synthesizer must follow
the MathSpeak rules. Simply reading the
On Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:40:37 AM UTC+1, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
Yes. Content policy checks are skipped when the loader has system
principal.
Thanks. Seems like I need to be more selective about when to give the channel
the system principal.
___
On Monday, 6 May 2013 14:12:48 UTC+1, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:24:07AM -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
I am still waiting for the rebuttal of my arguments, in the original email
in this thread, about how TeX is strictly better than MathML for the
particular task of
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:41:08AM -0700, David Dahl wrote:
KyotoCabinet might make a good backend for a new storage API:
http://fallabs.com/kyotocabinet/
It's released under the GPL, so it's MPL-incompatible, if I understand
correctly. As for the Kyoto Products Specific FOSS Library Linking
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 11:30:51AM -0700, mscl...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Monday, 6 May 2013 14:12:48 UTC+1, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:24:07AM -0400, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
I am still waiting for the rebuttal of my arguments, in the original
email
in this
On 5/6/2013 2:12 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
How many specific domains will want to have their own domain-specific
markup language next? Chemistry? Biology? Electronics? Music? Flow charts?
Calligraphy?
MathML specifies mathematical formulae, which is not domain-specific,
and is itself a building
2013/5/6 Joshua Cranmer pidgeo...@gmail.com
On 5/6/2013 2:12 PM, Benoit Jacob wrote:
How many specific domains will want to have their own domain-specific
markup language next? Chemistry? Biology? Electronics? Music? Flow charts?
Calligraphy?
MathML specifies mathematical formulae,
Friendly Reminder: Gecko Rendering (Layout, GFx, Media) meeting Today, May 6,
2:30 PM US/Pacific
--Jet
- Original Message -
From: Benoit Jacob jacob.benoi...@gmail.com
To: dev-platform dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org,
dev-plann...@lists.mozilla.org planning dev-plann...@lists.mozilla.org
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Benoit Jacob jacob.benoi...@gmail.comwrote:
How many specific domains will want to have their own domain-specific
markup language next? Chemistry? Biology? Electronics? Music? Flow charts?
Calligraphy?
This is a good question to ask, but I think it would help
Hopefully Web Components will provide a good solution to let authors extend
the browser with support for vocabularies that can be rendered via a
straightforward decomposition to HTML or MathML or SVG.
I think the layout requirements of MathML are too onerous for MathML to be
reduced to HTML or
It seems from the previous thread on this topic that there is enough
support for the idea to at least proceed with a trial to see how an
inbound2 would function in practice.
For this reason, RelEng will be configuring the cypress project branch
for this purpose and we will begin using it per
Benoit Jacob wrote:
Can we focus on the other conversation now: should the Web have a
math-specific markup format at all? I claim it shouldn't; I mostly
mentioned TeX as a if we really wanted one side note and let it go
out of hand.
How many specific domains will want to have their own
On 05/05/2013 09:07 PM, Felipe Gomes wrote:
Is the idea of smartmake to make things also work for non-toplevel folders? For
example, if I edit .cpp only in content/base/src, it should be enough to
rebuild that and toolkit/library. However, `mach build content/base/src` won't
add
On 13-05-06 9:03 PM, Josh Matthews wrote:
On 05/05/2013 09:07 PM, Felipe Gomes wrote:
Is the idea of smartmake to make things also work for non-toplevel
folders? For example, if I edit .cpp only in content/base/src, it
should be enough to rebuild that and toolkit/library. However, `mach
build
23 matches
Mail list logo
