Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Schubotz, Moritz
Hi Daniel,

Ok. Let's discuss!

Most interesting for me is Peters statements
> Content MathML is just not relevant.
Since I'm currently investigating how content MathML is used, and
whats needs to be done to get mathematical content from one system to
another.
Currently, I have the impression that the latter question is
completely solved in theory, but completely unsolved in practise.

Disclaimer: While I really appreciate drinking beer with Peter, we
have slightly different approaches for de facto standards to share
mathematics in information systems.

Best
Moritz


On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Peter Krautzberger, maintainer of MathJax, apparently thinks that MathML has
> failed as a web standard (even though it succeeded as an XML standard), and
> should be removed from HTML5. Here's the link:
>
> https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0186/
>
> It's quite a rant. Here's a quick TL;DR:
>
>> It doesn’t matter whether or not MathML is a good XML language. Personally, I
>> think it’s quite alright. It’s also clearly a success in the XML publishing
>> world, serving an important role in standards such as JATS and BITS.
>>
>> The problem is: MathML has failed on the web.
>
>> Not a single browser vendor has stated an intent to work on the code, not a
>> single browser developer has been seen on the MathWG. After 18 years, not a
>> single browser vendor is willing to dedicate even a small percentage of a
>> developer to MathML.
>
>> Math layout can and should be done in CSS and SVG. Let’s improve them
>> incrementally to make it simpler.
>>
>> It’s possible to generate HTML+CSS or SVG that renders any MathML content –
>> on the server, mind you, no client-side JS required (but of course possible).
>
>> Since layout is practically solved (or at least achievable), we really need
>> to solve the semantics. Presentation MathML is not sufficient, Content MathML
>> is just not relevant.
>>
>> We need to look where the web handles semantics today – that’s ARIA and HTML
>> but also microdata, rdfa etc.
>
> I think both, the rendering as well as the semantics, are well worth thinking
> about. Perhaps Wikimedia should reach out to Peter Krautzberger, and discuss
> some ideas of how math (and physics, and chemistry) content should be handled by
> Wikipedia, Wikidata, and friends. This seems like a cross roads, and we should
> have a hand in where things are going from here.
>
> -- daniel (not a MathML expert all all)
>



--
Moritz Schubotz
TU Berlin, Fakultät IV
DIMA - Sekr. EN7
Raum EN742
Einsteinufer 17
D-10587 Berlin
Germany

Tel.: +49 30 314 22784
Mobil.: +49 1578 047 1397
Fax:  +49 30 314 21601
E-Mail: [hidden email]
Skype: Schubi87
ICQ: 200302764
Msn: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Paul Topping
Yes, let's discuss. I wrote a response to Peter's post here: http://bit.ly/1ZLfCF8. Probably some on this list are aware of it but perhaps not all.

I believe it is important to separate out the different aspects of MathML as a standard. Peter scoped his post by saying that it had failed as a WEB standard right in the title. However, many will ignore that key word and see it as saying that MathML is a total failure which is clearly not the case. On Hacker News, they even discussed how TeX was a better language than MathML to type math. Peter's title is a provocative one and subject to much misinterpretation. This is one of the main reasons I wrote my response. I actually agree with a lot of Peter's observations but not their tone and the fact that they are presented in a manner that invites misinterpretation by the many that do not really understand MathML.

Paul Topping

Design Science, Inc.
"How Science Communicates"
Makers of MathType, MathFlow, MathPlayer, Equation Editor
http://www.dessci.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Moritz Schubotz [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 11:01 AM
> To: Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]; Peter
> Krautzberger <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Wikimedia developers <[hidden email]>; Schubotz,
> Moritz <[hidden email]>; wikidata-tech <wikidata-
> [hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Ok. Let's discuss!
>
> Most interesting for me is Peters statements
> > Content MathML is just not relevant.
> Since I'm currently investigating how content MathML is used, and
> whats needs to be done to get mathematical content from one system to
> another.
> Currently, I have the impression that the latter question is
> completely solved in theory, but completely unsolved in practise.
>
> Disclaimer: While I really appreciate drinking beer with Peter, we
> have slightly different approaches for de facto standards to share
> mathematics in information systems.
>
> Best
> Moritz
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Peter Krautzberger, maintainer of MathJax, apparently thinks that MathML
> has
> > failed as a web standard (even though it succeeded as an XML standard),
> and
> > should be removed from HTML5. Here's the link:
> >
> > https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0186/
> >
> > It's quite a rant. Here's a quick TL;DR:
> >
> >> It doesn’t matter whether or not MathML is a good XML language.
> Personally, I
> >> think it’s quite alright. It’s also clearly a success in the XML publishing
> >> world, serving an important role in standards such as JATS and BITS.
> >>
> >> The problem is: MathML has failed on the web.
> >
> >> Not a single browser vendor has stated an intent to work on the code, not
> a
> >> single browser developer has been seen on the MathWG. After 18 years,
> not a
> >> single browser vendor is willing to dedicate even a small percentage of a
> >> developer to MathML.
> >
> >> Math layout can and should be done in CSS and SVG. Let’s improve them
> >> incrementally to make it simpler.
> >>
> >> It’s possible to generate HTML+CSS or SVG that renders any MathML
> content –
> >> on the server, mind you, no client-side JS required (but of course
> possible).
> >
> >> Since layout is practically solved (or at least achievable), we really need
> >> to solve the semantics. Presentation MathML is not sufficient, Content
> MathML
> >> is just not relevant.
> >>
> >> We need to look where the web handles semantics today – that’s ARIA
> and HTML
> >> but also microdata, rdfa etc.
> >
> > I think both, the rendering as well as the semantics, are well worth thinking
> > about. Perhaps Wikimedia should reach out to Peter Krautzberger, and
> discuss
> > some ideas of how math (and physics, and chemistry) content should be
> handled by
> > Wikipedia, Wikidata, and friends. This seems like a cross roads, and we
> should
> > have a hand in where things are going from here.
> >
> > -- daniel (not a MathML expert all all)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Moritz Schubotz
> TU Berlin, Fakultät IV
> DIMA - Sekr. EN7
> Raum EN742
> Einsteinufer 17
> D-10587 Berlin
> Germany
>
> Tel.: +49 30 314 22784
> Mobil.: +49 1578 047 1397
> Fax:  +49 30 314 21601
> E-Mail: [hidden email]
> Skype: Schubi87
> ICQ: 200302764
> Msn: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Daniel Kinzler
In reply to this post by Schubotz, Moritz
Am 07.04.2016 um 20:00 schrieb Moritz Schubotz:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Ok. Let's discuss!

Great! But let's keep the discussion in one place. I made a mess by
cross-posting this to two lists, now it's three, it seems. Can we agree on
<[hidden email]> as the venue of discussion? At least for the
discussion of MathML in the context of Wikimedia, that would be the best place,
I think.

-- daniel



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Paul Topping
I have no problem with that but are some of these lists members-only? I was told when I replied that my message would be reviewed by the moderator as I wasn't a member. Perhaps that was the W3C list.

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kinzler [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 11:06 AM
> To: Moritz Schubotz <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]; Peter
> Krautzberger <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Wikimedia developers <[hidden email]>; wikidata-tech
> <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML
>
> Am 07.04.2016 um 20:00 schrieb Moritz Schubotz:
> > Hi Daniel,
> >
> > Ok. Let's discuss!
>
> Great! But let's keep the discussion in one place. I made a mess by
> cross-posting this to two lists, now it's three, it seems. Can we agree on
> <[hidden email]> as the venue of discussion? At least for the
> discussion of MathML in the context of Wikimedia, that would be the best
> place,
> I think.
>
> -- daniel
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Paul Topping
Peter just posted a follow up response, largely commenting on my response: https://www.peterkrautzberger.org/0187/.

First, I suspect the reason his post doesn't get as much discussion as he'd like is because his blog doesn't accept comments. I can understand why he doesn't enable comments on his personal blog but why not post it somewhere that DOES accept comments?

He says that most of the discussion has been private. That is not the way to change a standard or replace it by a new one. By all means have your private conversations but don't expect others to agree with any conclusions reached in them. The result of good ideas expressed in private conversation should be to introduce them into public conversation. Instead, his post treated MathML's failure as a fait accompli. Perhaps it is but only in the narrow scope of it being ignored by browser makers.

He feels that many things I said in my reply were more about expressing my own ideas. I'll cop to that. I felt that was needed to indicate that there are other points of view and other ideas. His solutions may not be the right ones. Let's open up the discussion.

Can we identify specific topics worthy of addressing and discuss them? I tried to hint at some possible directions in my reply, which is why it veered into some of my own ideas. I would love for this to be a constructive discussion. Instead of discussing whether MathML is a failed standard, I would like to see real, open discussion on solutions to various problems. Any takers?

Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Topping [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 2:02 PM
> To: Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]>; Moritz Schubotz <schubotz@tu-
> berlin.de>; [hidden email]; Peter Krautzberger
> <[hidden email]>
> Cc: Wikimedia developers <[hidden email]>; wikidata-tech
> <[hidden email]>
> Subject: RE: MathML is dead, long live MathML
>
> I have no problem with that but are some of these lists members-only? I was
> told when I replied that my message would be reviewed by the moderator as
> I wasn't a member. Perhaps that was the W3C list.
>
> Paul
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Kinzler [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 11:06 AM
> > To: Moritz Schubotz <[hidden email]>; [hidden email]; Peter
> > Krautzberger <[hidden email]>
> > Cc: Wikimedia developers <[hidden email]>; wikidata-tech
> > <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML
> >
> > Am 07.04.2016 um 20:00 schrieb Moritz Schubotz:
> > > Hi Daniel,
> > >
> > > Ok. Let's discuss!
> >
> > Great! But let's keep the discussion in one place. I made a mess by
> > cross-posting this to two lists, now it's three, it seems. Can we agree on
> > <[hidden email]> as the venue of discussion? At least for
> the
> > discussion of MathML in the context of Wikimedia, that would be the best
> > place,
> > I think.
> >
> > -- daniel
> >
> >

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Peter Krautzberger
In reply to this post by Daniel Kinzler
Hi Daniel,

Could you let me know once you've decided on a venue for discussion? I'd be happy to join in.

Thanks in advance,
Peter.


On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]> wrote:
Am 07.04.2016 um 20:00 schrieb Moritz Schubotz:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Ok. Let's discuss!

Great! But let's keep the discussion in one place. I made a mess by
cross-posting this to two lists, now it's three, it seems. Can we agree on
<[hidden email]> as the venue of discussion? At least for the
discussion of MathML in the context of Wikimedia, that would be the best place,
I think.

-- daniel


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

Daniel Kinzler
In reply to this post by Paul Topping
Am 07.04.2016 um 23:01 schrieb Paul Topping:
> I have no problem with that but are some of these lists members-only? I was
> told when I replied that my message would be reviewed by the moderator as I
> wasn't a member. Perhaps that was the W3C list.

Oh... both the Wikimedia lists are members only, I'm afraid. The W3C list
requires a 1-click agreement to their terms. That's easier, but less likely to
involve Wikimedia people.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: MathML is dead, long live MathML

RIMartin7-2
Hello,  how many of us have github accounts?


On Friday, April 8, 2016 6:10 AM, Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]> wrote:


Am 07.04.2016 um 23:01 schrieb Paul Topping:

> I have no problem with that but are some of these lists members-only? I was
> told when I replied that my message would be reviewed by the moderator as I
> wasn't a member. Perhaps that was the W3C list.


Oh... both the Wikimedia lists are members only, I'm afraid. The W3C list
requires a 1-click agreement to their terms. That's easier, but less likely to
involve Wikimedia people.