[om] comments on documents

Paul Libbrecht paul at activemath.org
Fri May 17 20:58:34 CEST 2002


Let me tell you that Im' happy with the fact that such a comment is made.
Allow me to encourage the fact that we have such a comparison: for many 
folks, OpenMath just does not exist, and they're happy (for a while) 
with the heuristic-based conversion of mathML-presentation to 
mathML-content such as the one provided by MathType. This happiness may, 
of course, end up at some point where semantic starts to be a bit richer 
than what MathML group pretends to be k14 (*).

For these kind of persons (and they are lots in the world), such a 
report on differences was urgently needed !


(*) anyone doubting there are some folks which realize the limitations 
of MathML-content should read the posts at w3c-math mailing list, among 

On Friday, May 17, 2002, at 07:05 PM, David Carlisle wrote:

>> It would provide a review outside the OM club.
> perhaps, but there are other priorities at present. The document is
> available in public so anyone is free to comment on it.
om at openmath.org  -  general discussion on OpenMath
Post public announcements to om-announce at openmath.org
Automatic list maintenance software at majordomo at openmath.org
Mail om-owner at openmath.org for assistance with any problems

More information about the Om mailing list