On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 01:11:14AM -0700, Toby Bartels wrote:
Jan Hidders wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
>Jan Hidders wrote:
You intend to render [$...$] by calling LaTeX (possibly using a script to
render simple things in other ways, but still ultimately to make LaTeX the
arbiter of meaning), right?
Exactly. And these other ways could also be MathML, for example.
But now should I understand that you won't
normally use it in an
expression like [$x^2y = z_1$]; you'd write [$x^2$][$y$] = [$z_1$], and
save the full power of LaTeX for the fancy stuff? That would keep people
from trying [$x% = x/100$], mostly.
Ah, isn't communication wonderful if it works. :-) Actually I would even
expect people to write [$x$]<sup>2</sup>[$y$]. However, if I'm honest I
have to admit that my fingers would be itching to change that to [$x^2y =
that's just it.
>We must mention LaTeX to make [$c^2$] work your way.
Where in my little explanation did I use the word
If [$...$] calls LaTeX, then I hope that you mention it ''somewhere''.
I understand that you don't have to mention it at the ''beginning''.
Well, having thought about it a bit more, maybe I *would* mention it at the
beginning. If [$ .. $] means that its contents is going to be interpreted as
LaTeX markup then that is what the first sentence of its description should
say. But I would follow that with saying that for simple mathematics you
only have to know [$x_1$] and [$y^k$] means.
I also am speaking about ''if'' we
introduce a markup for LaTeX;
but my argument is that it shouldn't make simple things any harder,
or introduce surprises into simple things (like weird behavior for "%").
I agree, and that is one of the reasons that I now think that we should
mention LaTeX right from the beginning. People then would know that "weird"
stuff might happen if they are going to put more than just variable
names between [$ and $].
I remember these, and I agree that there's no
point in rehashing them.
It's the comment that <var> was never intended for mathematical variables
that caught my eye. I'd like to hear more about that, if you want, either
here or elsewhere.
Well, I didn't consider that an important argument because it is what
browser are actually doing with it at the moment that matters. Anyway. The
description in HTML2.0:
The VAR element indicates a placeholder variable, typically rendered as
italic. For example:
Type <SAMP>html-check <VAR>file</VAR> | more</SAMP> to check
<VAR>file</VAR> for markup errors.
used for variables or arguments to commands
and in HTML4.0:
Indicates an instance of a variable or program argument.
In "A beginners guide to HTML" (originally at NCSA) it is described as:
for a "metasyntactic" variable, where the user is to replace the
variable with a specific instance. Typically displayed in italics.
(<kbd>rm</kbd> <var>filename</var> deletes the file.)
-- Jan Hidders