Oistein E. Andersen wrote: > > This issue [font selection] belong to presentational layer and has to be > > addressed > >on CSS side (there are no problems on XSL and/or DSSSL side as one can make > >appropriate transformations). > > I am not so sure about that.
In fact I am not sure either. > The difference between bold, italic and script > can be just as important as the distinction between base, superscript and > subscript. > Explicit mark-up is provided in ISO-12083, MathML and TeX, among others, > and mathemtical characters (which we would like to use, but cannot -- yet?) > have been added to Unicode because of their semantical importance. If the > removal > of class attributes is supposed to preserve meaning, then it does not seem > right > to use this very attribute to encode different math alphabets. Yes, one can add special attribute for this purpose. Do you have any concrete propopsal? > > [classes:] "vector" or "Hilbert-vector" [or] "ket". > >I would leave [the choice] to authors until that a generic > >semantic markup was achieved, proved to be consistent and powerful and > >then used by authors. > > With all the different concepts and notational conventions that exist in > different > scientific fields and mathematical disciplines, no such thing as a generic > semantic mark-up is likely to appear any time soon. I tend to believe that > you agree. Agree. However those who are interested in generic semantic mark-up will have access to semantic layer of current proposal via set of predefined attributes (currently role and mprofile, extra attributes may be added after consultations with people invloved in projects like OpenMath, CanonML etc.) -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 8 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze
