3 Comments

1. hAl September 25, 2007 @ 3:34 pm

   Unsolvable
   Office Math ML (OMML) allows for integration of Office functionality wich MathML does not allow.
   Also OMML being a superset of of MathML functionaility is easy to convert to MathML and MAthML is easy to convert to OMML by relativly simple XLST tranformation where of course the integrated office markup is not transformed.
   So basically OMML is fully compatible to MathML but allows for extra office document functionality. Going to MathML would be a regression

2. Jim Meyer December 4, 2007 @ 6:45 pm

   This also suggests, similar to FI-3, that a multipart standard proposal be submitted.

   Integration with Office is not a feature I believe has relevance. Instead, this standard should drive implementation, not the inverse.

   The scope of the set/superset capabilities would need to be shown on its own merit, not implied. If the extended features are product-based only, I find the functionality claim dubious.

3. hAl December 5, 2007 @ 11:10 am

   Integration with Office features should be a prerequisite for any format embedded in an office document format.
   Clearly MathML is more of a presentation format for webpages than a serieus format for shared office documents. For instance Math formaula’s you would expect in a scientific environment where documents are distributed, reviewed and/or corrected and then merged back again. This is properly supported by integration of relavant OOXML tags that can be used in OMML as well.
   Such basic office document features are not supported by using MathML.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.