Re: [LaTeXML] Fwd: Special TeX/LaTeX fonts in MathML (calligraphy vs. script)

Le 17/07/2014 10:31, David Carlisle a =E9crit :
> Sorry I don't understand that comment at all, if I write  MathML to TeX
> converter ion XSLT and choose to
> detect <mi class=3D"womble">A</mi> to generate \mathcal{A} then the wuoted
> paragraph is telling me that's OK.
> XSLT is only being used as an example transformational mechanism there,
> if you write the same thing in javascript
> the same rules apply.

It's because I'm considering the MathJax output a "MathML rendering =

engine" while in your comparison with XSLT your are considering it a =

"transformation mechanism". But whatever the point of view, the =

interpretation of the class=3D"MJX-..." to generate a specific rendering =

is specific to MathJax, to the XSLT transform or to your transformation =

mechanism. So if you don't like the term non-standard, call it an =

"extension of MathML", a "special behavior" or a "proprietary feature". =

But still that won't change that the only guarantee you have when =

passing "<mi class=3D"womble">A</mi>" is that it will rendered as an =

italic A by a MathML rendering engines + optionally some CSS style if =

you provide a stylesheet. AFAIK, any other behavior is not defined by =

existing Web standards.

> No that is exact;y what the mathml spec does _not_ say. It explicitly
> says in the paragraph I quoted earlier that a MathML generator such
> LaTeXML may use the class attribute to affect the styling  and that it
> _may_ use css syntax in that attribute, but even if css syntax is used
> it does not say that css has to be used to render it "Typically this
> would be a space separated sequence of words, but this is not specified
> by MathML."

So the only thing you're saying is that MathML is not so strict on the =

interpretation of the class attribute. But still, I don't see where it =

is specified in the MathML spec that the exact class=3D"MJX-..." is to be =

interpreted as the MathJax rendering does, so to me this behavior is not =

standardized and specific to MathJax. I say "non-standard" for something =

that is not defined by any standard while for you anything that does not =

contradict the spec seems to be "standard". Well, that's probably a =

different point of view, but for me it's a problem to rely on a feature =

specific to only one rendering engine...

> That would be good but do you have a suggestion? The only suggestions
> that I'm aware of currently are using a class then
> using css elsewhere to select the font features as you demonstrated
> earlier. Or getting a change to Unicode to distinguish
> these characters (which has possibly a simpler end story but far more
> complicated procedural path to reach that)

It seems that the only reasonable change is to define new unicode points =

and mathvariants. Or to leave this undefined in the MathML spec and =

leave the definition of specific rendering to other specifications like =

CSS or Open Font Format.

> Well yes that's the question: when they decided on this last time they
> decided that calligraphic and script were just font choices
> typically to get a change you/we/someone would have to find a body of
> published work that is clearly using mathcal and mathscript
> for different uses in the same document.

It looks like many people in this thread agree that mathcal and =

mathscript have different meaning, so that's probably worth considering.

> Yes the CSS may be standard but to generate mathml that uses that css
> (or equivalent, such as a TeX based typesetter)
> don't you in practice need some standardised class names that you
> objected to above? or else the styled mathml
> will only use the intended alphabet style if used with one target
> stylesheet?

No you don't need to standardize anything about the class name, the =

rendering is already defined by CSS / Open Font Format (and as I said, =

standardizing anything would probably clash with CSS). Authors will just =

use whatever CSS selectors they want (not just class) and must indeed =

provide the associated stylesheet... well that's just how we handle Web =

documents! If that's a problem that e.g. the calligraphic style is lost =

(e.g. if one disable the document stylesheet or copy the MathML source =

code) then that certainly is an indication that it has a specific =

semantic and so again standardizing it as unicode/mathvariant should be =

considered instead.

-- =

Fr=E9d=E9ric Wang
maths-informatique-jeux.com/blog/frederic