Re: [Texmacs-dev] Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: [xml-litprog-l] Re: noweb, pamphlets, and TeXmacs

[Mike Dewar]

On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 12:01:40PM +0100, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:
<snip>
> > As far as rendering goes, Mozilla based its MathML rendering on TeX and
> > is really quite good.  The same code also found its way into Netscape 7.
> 
> But this allows you only to *render* mathematics, not *editing* it.
True, I merely quoted it because of the quality of the markup.  If you
want to edit MathML/OpenMath etc. then there are lots of options:
Mathtype and WebEQ from Design Science, a free add-on to TechExplorer
from IBM (whose name I forget), JOME from the University of Nice, and
several others which I hadn't heard of until I looked at the MathML
software page a couple of minutes ago.  

Quite how useful graphical manipulation of mathematics is is
questionable, but the ability to select/cut/paste sub-expressions in a
graphical environment does seem important to me.

<snip>
> I indeed think that the whole system MathML/Openmath is more complex
> than necessary.
Well that depends what you want to do, other people say that they are
not sophisticated enough for formal applications.  For what I want to do
they're about right ;-)

>                 Also, it has mainly been developed with rendering
> in mind, not editing. I finally notice that Openmath does not seem
???  MathML presentation is by definition about presentation.  OpenMath
and MathML-content are about semantics which is what you need in a piece
of mathematical software.

> to work very well.
In what sense?

Mike.

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.