Hi Andrew,
I think the ability to easily add and maintain internal cross references
is pretty essential for the specification, although such things could
probably always be resolved with some pre/post-processing script. Might
be easier in terms of support if its an already existing feature of t
> 1) can represent MathML in either content or presentation format and
> can render MathML in the HTML output using image replacements instead
> of expecting that the browser can render MathML (content or
> presentation)
is the use of image based equations still required? if people are using
> Another option would be to have our own simple XML markup language along
> with XSLT that produces DocBook (I know nothing about CWML - is it XML
> based? Can it be transformed into DocBook?)
The decision we made previously was to move from a custom XML language
(CWML) to something more stand
> For the purpose of presentation math, LaTex substrings get my vote.
the problem with LaTeX math is that it is quite unfamiliar to a lot of
people, whereas most people involved in CellML probably have a
reasonable grasp of at least content MathML if not presentation MathML
also. The conversi
>
>> More generally, I think XML source formats should be avoided if
>> possible.
>
> Just wondering if you can explain your reasoning for this?
>
>
reading plain text in a text editor is more pleasant
reading diffs of plain text is more pleasant
___
