Re: MathML is a failed web standard (or not?)
Peter Krautzberger <[email protected]> Fri, 8 Apr 2016 09:40:28 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.mathematics |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CABqxo802nfQ25W7c9LTh=oS_oEgCBsARQpWzC3Ngf3gw1sbD+g@mail.gmail.com> |
--001a11441cae132b7d052ff44f55 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Peter and Andrew, Thanks for those interesting statements. I'm not sure how they relate to what I wrote (please let me know if I missed something) but I appreciate having the opportunity to read them. Regards, Peter. On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Andrew Robbins <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear MathML Subscribers, > > I must admit that I have not read every word of both posts, but I already > know what this is about, because I have already encountered similar issues, > with both Presentation and Content. I'm not too concerned with > Presentation, because MathJax does an excellent job at that. What I am > concerned with is Content (i.e. Semantics), and to quote the original > article: > > "Content MathML is just not relevant." -- Peter Krautzberger > > I have been writing a set of tools for trans-language compilation for > about 5 years now, (freely available at > https://github.com/andydude/droxtools), and the only system I've found > that is is open, non-commercial, and easily extensible for representing > arbitrary concepts from every programming language ever invented, is > Content MathML. This is the opposite of "not relevant", and Paul Topping > failed to address this. > > In my humble opinion, the reason why MathML has failed isn't because of > Content MathML, it's because of Presentation MathML, and it's not because > it isn't accurate, or because it doesn't look good, it's because people > prefer TeX over angle brackets. MathJax provides people the ability to show > the same beautiful math expressions on web pages, that Presentation MathML > promised but with many fewer keystrokes. > > I don't care about angle brackets. I don't care about superscripts. The > only thing that interests me with regards to Content MathML, is the fact > that it is, at a fundamental level, a LISP where symbols are selected from > URI/RDF/XML/MathML namespaces. Granted, OpenMath/MathML namespaces are > naturally defined to be equivalent, but to apply to XML/QNames as well, > then you need a QName to URI mapping. I've seen two of these, the > "{NS}NAME" method (think Java/Ruby/Python) and the "NS::NAME" method (think > JavaScript/E4X), the first one fails to produce a valid URI, but the second > method does produce a valid URI, so that's what I've been using in my > tools. The point is that URIs are already a carefully controlled resource, > and so they are much more open than LISP's traditional filesystem based > package system, or any other system I've seen. > > Just in the interest of full disclosure, there are closed, commercial > systems out there that do trans-language compilation, like the kind I'm > currently developing. https://www.semanticdesigns.com/ is an example of a > corporation involved in such a business. But I whole-heartedly believe that > the future of open-source software depends on having such tools available > as open source tools. This is starting to sound like a rant, so I will stop > it here. > > Actually, I changed my mind. I still have to have a Content vs. > Presentation debate. As I said earlier, I agree that Presentation MathML > has failed, but that's because it's a failed viewpoint. Math isn't symbols, > it's semantics. From the beginning, MathML should have been about Content, > not Presentation. I think if we had focused on Content all along, then we > probably wouldn't be having this conversation now. > > Regards, > Andrew Robbins > > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I write as a chemist who has tried to do the same thing with Chemistry >> (CML, Chemical Markup Language). I have been inspired by what I see as the >> success of MathML and do not regard it as a failure. I am particularly >> interested in Content MathML as computable maths. >> >> The reality seems to be that it takes a generation for many of these >> ideas to be implemented. in 1998 SVG seemed to be the obvious way of doing >> graphics, but after 5 years it looked close to death. After 15 years it's >> become universal. >> >> CML is used by a small number of enthusiasts. The chemical software >> manufacturers don't care because they only care about the pharma industry >> and instruments. So we strugle on with a number of ad hoc broken >> representations of chemistry, which are still primarily graphical. There is >> almost no chemistry for blind people. >> >> The real problem is semantics. At the moment the world doesn't care. They >> will have to in the future. IoT demands semantics. You cannot compute >> pictures. Binding semantics to maths and chemistry is hard but it will have >> to come. I'd guess that people will need semantic math in 5 years and >> chemistry in 15. >> >> If you let the world be driven by browser manufacturers and publishers >> you will get a sighted-human vision of maths and science. The IoT won't >> need browsers. >> >> It WILL need semantic maths. >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:10 PM, Paul Topping <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Peter Krautzberger of MathJax fame, recently posted this on his own blog: >>> >>> MathML is a failed web standard >>> https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0186/ >>> >>> Obviously, he presents some challenges to the MathML standard and its >>> community. I felt that I had to respond: >>> >>> Response to Peter Krautzberger's "MathML is a failed web standard" >>> http://bit.ly/1ZLfCF8 >>> >>> I hope this exchange prompts some serious dialog. >>> >>> Paul Topping >>> >>> Design Science, Inc. >>> "How Science Communicates" >>> Makers of MathType, MathFlow, MathPlayer, Equation Editor >>> http://www.dessci.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Peter Murray-Rust >> Reader in Molecular Informatics >> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry >> University of Cambridge >> CB2 1EW, UK >> +44-1223-763069 >> > > --001a11441cae132b7d052ff44f55 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <div dir=3D"ltr">Hi Peter and Andrew,<div><br></div><div>Thanks for those i= nteresting statements. I'm not sure how they relate to what I wrote (pl= ease let me know if I missed something) but I appreciate having the opportu= nity to read them.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Peter.</div>= </div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr= 2, 2016 at 3:42 AM, Andrew Robbins <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto= :[email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>></span> wrot= e:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-l= eft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Dear MathML Subs= cribers,</div><div><br></div>I must admit that I have not read every word o= f both posts, but I already know what this is about, because I have already= encountered similar issues, with both Presentation and Content. I'm no= t too concerned with Presentation, because MathJax does an excellent job at= that. What I am concerned with is Content (i.e. Semantics), and to quote t= he original article:<div><br><div>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 "Content MathML is jus= t not relevant." --=C2=A0Peter Krautzberger</div></div><div><br></div>= <div>I have been writing a set of tools for trans-language compilation for = about 5 years now, (freely available at=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://github.com/= andydude/droxtools" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/andydude/droxtools= </a>), and the only system I've found that is is open, non-commercial, = and easily extensible for representing arbitrary concepts from every progra= mming language ever invented, is Content MathML. This is the opposite of &q= uot;not relevant", and=C2=A0Paul Topping failed to address this.</div>= <div><br></div><div>In my humble opinion, the reason why MathML has failed = isn't because of Content MathML, it's because of Presentation MathM= L, and it's not because it isn't accurate, or because it doesn'= t look good, it's because people prefer TeX over angle brackets. MathJa= x provides people the ability to show the same beautiful math expressions o= n web pages, that Presentation MathML promised but with many fewer keystrok= es.</div><div><br></div><div>I don't care about angle brackets. I don&#= 39;t care about superscripts. The only thing that interests me with regards= to Content MathML, is the fact that it is, at a fundamental level, a LISP = where symbols are selected from URI/RDF/XML/MathML namespaces. Granted, Ope= nMath/MathML namespaces are naturally defined to be equivalent, but to appl= y to XML/QNames as well, then you need a QName to URI mapping. I've see= n two of these, the "{NS}NAME" method=C2=A0(think Java/Ruby/Pytho= n)=C2=A0and the "NS::NAME" method=C2=A0(think JavaScript/E4X), th= e first one fails to produce a valid URI, but the second method does produc= e a valid URI, so that's what I've been using in my tools. The poin= t is that URIs are already a carefully controlled resource, and so they are= much more open than LISP's traditional filesystem based package system= , or any other system I've seen.</div><div><br></div><div>Just in the i= nterest of full disclosure, there are closed, commercial systems out there = that do trans-language compilation, like the kind I'm currently develop= ing.=C2=A0<a href=3D"https://www.semanticdesigns.com/" target=3D"_blank">ht= tps://www.semanticdesigns.com/</a> is an example of a corporation involved = in such a business. But I whole-heartedly believe that the future of open-s= ource software depends on having such tools available as open source tools.= This is starting to sound like a rant, so I will stop it here.</div><div><= br></div><div>Actually, I changed my mind. I still have to have a Content v= s. Presentation debate. As I said earlier, I agree that Presentation MathML= has failed, but that's because it's a failed viewpoint. Math isn&#= 39;t symbols, it's semantics. From the beginning, MathML should have be= en about Content, not Presentation. I think if we had focused on Content al= l along, then we probably wouldn't be having this conversation now.</di= v><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Andrew Robbins</div><div><br></div= ></div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><= br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Peter Murray-= Rust <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" target=3D"_bl= ank">[email protected]</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_qu= ote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex= "><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div>I write as a chemist who has tried to do the s= ame thing with Chemistry (CML, Chemical Markup Language). I have been inspi= red by what I see as the success of MathML and do not regard it as a failur= e. I am particularly interested in Content MathML as computable maths.<br><= br></div>The reality seems to be that it takes a generation for many of the= se ideas to be implemented. in 1998 SVG seemed to be the obvious way of doi= ng graphics, but after 5 years it looked close to death. After 15 years it&= #39;s become universal.<br><br></div><div>CML is used by a small number of = enthusiasts. The chemical software manufacturers don't care because the= y only care about the pharma industry and instruments. So we strugle on wit= h a number of ad hoc broken representations of chemistry, which are still p= rimarily graphical. There is almost no chemistry for blind people.<br><br><= /div><div>The real problem is semantics. At the moment the world doesn'= t care. They will have to in the future. IoT demands semantics. You cannot = compute pictures. Binding semantics to maths and chemistry is hard but it w= ill have to come. I'd guess that people will need semantic math in 5 ye= ars and chemistry in 15. <br><br></div><div>If you let the world be driven = by browser manufacturers and publishers you will get a sighted-human vision= of maths and science. The IoT won't need browsers.<br><br></div><div>I= t WILL need semantic maths.<br></div><div><div><br></div></div></div><div c= lass=3D"gmail_extra"><div><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 1= , 2016 at 11:10 PM, Paul Topping <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:pa= [email protected]" target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>></span> wrote:<br= ><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1= px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br> <br> Peter Krautzberger of MathJax fame, recently posted this on his own blog:<b= r> <br> MathML is a failed web standard<br> <a href=3D"https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0186/" rel=3D"noreferrer" targ= et=3D"_blank">https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0186/</a><br> <br> Obviously, he presents some challenges to the MathML standard and its commu= nity. I felt that I had to respond:<br> <br> Response to Peter Krautzberger's "MathML is a failed web standard&= quot;<br> <a href=3D"http://bit.ly/1ZLfCF8" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http= ://bit.ly/1ZLfCF8</a><br> <br> I hope this exchange prompts some serious dialog.<br> <br> Paul Topping<br> <br> Design Science, Inc.<br> "How Science Communicates"<br> Makers of MathType, MathFlow, MathPlayer, Equation Editor<br> <a href=3D"http://www.dessci.com" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http= ://www.dessci.com</a><br> <br> <br> <br> <br> </blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br></div></div><span><font color= =3D"#888888">-- <br><div>Peter Murray-Rust<br>Reader in Molecular Informati= cs<br>Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry<br>University of Cambridge<br>CB2 = 1EW, UK<br><a href=3D"tel:%2B44-1223-763069" value=3D"+441223763069" target= =3D"_blank">+44-1223-763069</a></div> </font></span></div> </blockquote></div><br></div> </div></div></blockquote></div><br></div> --001a11441cae132b7d052ff44f55--