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

On 17/07/2014 21:50, Fr=E9d=E9ric Wang wrote:
> Personally, I'd prefer to let people specify their own CSS themselves =

> rather than trying to magically do something that they may not =

> actually want. =


That's not an unreasonable position to take although (in the absence of =

an update to Unicode and matching updates to fonts, which would be years =

at least) that would mean that any document using a mathml fragment to =

be rendered in calligraphic would need at the document level to apply =

some css to achieve that. That's certainly less convenient for mathml =

generating tools (as basically it means they can't support calligraphic =

within the math expression) but I'm not strongly arguing that you should =

do differently as it is I agree a coherent position to take.
But suggesting a class name can't hurt in any case as something like =

that would be needed in any case for other systems as I said. No need to =

highlight mathjax theer are many non css based systems Word for example.

when I said standardising class names was hardly a novel idea I was =

alluding   to

http://microformats.org/

and similar initiatives.

you could make exactly the same objection against microformat

<a  class=3D"h-card"  href=3D"http://benward.me">Ben Ward</a>

that if a random user stylesheet has a selector for .h-card then odd things=
 might happen.

David