Greetings Karl and Michal, Michal Hoftich <michal....@gmail.com> writes:
> Follow-up Comment #5, bug #340 (project tex4ht): > > I've just found that LO can read mathml files without > prefix, I must had done some mistake previously when it > didn't work. The issue with prefix-less mathml is that > processing with xtpipes don't work. For MathML I think it's better -- and sometimes more inter-operable -- simply to insert the full MathML namespace via the xmlns attribute in each <math> element and avoid prefixing altogether. Of course, if inside a <math> element you want to insert something that is not MathML, that (a) is probably going to cause a problem somewhere and (b) would require either prefixing or inserting an xmlns attribute on each external subelement. With HTML5 (as text/html) using prefixes will cause breakage. Using an xmlns attribute on a <math> element in HTML5 is unnecessary but should go as unrecognized and be ignored by web browsers. It is helpful when one wants the code to work for both the text/html and the application/xhtml+xml serializations of HTML5. I'm guessing that this technique would be good for xtpipes. > I've also found interesting thread [1], where odt export > from tex4ht is discussed. It seems that at least 7 years > ago improving bugs in mathml import wasn't important for > OO devs (I totally understand that they didn't had enough > developers, moreover developers who understand mathml). > ... And, alas, failing to include presentation mathml in the html namespace was a way to make support of mathml in web browsers have secondary importance. There are problems in browser handling of HTML5 that result from having MathML be external. For example, a comma following an inline <math> element may wind up on the following line, whereas a comma following an (inline) <em> element will not. -- Bill