Issue 10284 - Support MathML 2.0
Summary: Support MathML 2.0
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Math
Classification: Application
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 1.0.0
Hardware: PC Windows 2000
: P3 Normal with 11 votes (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: AOO issues mailing list
QA Contact:
URL:
Keywords: rfe_eval_ok
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2002-12-23 14:06 UTC by iherman
Modified: 2013-08-07 14:54 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: ENHANCEMENT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: Moderate


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description iherman 2002-12-23 14:06:16 UTC
I looked at the MathML output of the formula editor, and I found several
issues... essentially, what I would like to see is that the output is a fully
compliant mathml file, which can therefore be used with other tools and
converters. However

- the file uses openoffice' own dtd; why not using the mathml2.0 dtd from w3c?
- for various symbols like integrals, sums, etc, why not use the entities
defined by w3c? A number of converter tools rely on these symbols
- why enclosing the full formula into a <math:semantics> element? this makes it
difficult to handle the file

Note that having a free tools to create mathml formulae is an incredibly
valuable tool for the community, so it would really be worth improve it toward
mathml 2 (and announce this feature more widely!)
Comment 1 thomas.lange 2003-01-03 08:22:56 UTC
TL->CMC: Can you comment about this?
Thanks!
Comment 2 caolanm 2003-01-28 11:52:08 UTC
>- the file uses openoffice' own dtd; why not using the mathml2.0 dtd
>from w3c?

Well the short of it is that mathml 2 didn't exist when I started. And
there was a requirement from our xml group that everything be inside
the openoffice xml namespace so the dtd used is the mathml 1.01 dtd
with namespaces added to it.

>- for various symbols like integrals, sums, etc, why not use the
>entities defined by w3c? A number of converter tools rely on these
>symbols

I'd love to as well, but on import entities are replaced with their
equivalent unicode codepoints by the underlying xml library before
they get to the mathml parser, and on export a substitution back to
entities is similiar not in the mathml parsers power at present. This
is something that would need to be discussed with our xml people.

>- why enclosing the full formula into a <math:semantics> element?
this >makes it difficult to handle the file

You can only edit equations in starmath through its own UI equation
language like latex/ezmath. To retain this text the semantics element
is needed. If the text changed, even for trivial whitespace changes or
replacing one equation text with another equivalent one, then user's
would have a format where what they save is what they see on load.

There is certainly an argument that the semantics tag should be broken
down to seperate tags which surround invididual elements to closer
denote what matches to what. But it is an unavoidable requirement of
the current starmath system as far as I can see that the original user
entered text be retained somewhere. And that is what the semantics
element is specifically in the mathml spec for, so that's why it is in
use.

>Note that having a free tools to create mathml formulae is an
>incredibly valuable tool for the community, so it would really be
>worth improve it toward mathml 2 (and announce this feature more
>widely!)

It would indeed be very nice, but a good deal of work. So it don't be
possible to tackle this in the 1.1 beta timeframe. So I'll target this
for OOo 2.0 and revisit it.
Comment 3 caolanm 2003-08-19 10:47:06 UTC
Reopen to reassign
Comment 4 caolanm 2003-08-19 10:47:48 UTC
cmc->bh: A request to support MathML 2.0 for import/export.
Comment 5 bettina.haberer 2003-10-20 12:47:02 UTC
Hello Caolan, I leave this issue on the OO.o 2.0 flag. Could you
please take this one to your ownership for implementation. Thank you.
Comment 6 caolanm 2003-10-20 12:54:40 UTC
cmc->bh/ama: Ah, are we sure about this?.. this would be a load of
work, there are loads of features in mathml2.0 which are not supported
by our starmath at all, and some which are likely not to map well to
the new mathml 2.0 without a lot of effort on our side. I'd be
reluctant to take on board such an open ended 2.0 task given all the
other existing .doc and .rtf work which we are also trying to do for
this target. I see this mathml 2.0 stuff as a desirable feature,
rather than a must have.
Comment 7 bettina.haberer 2003-10-20 14:36:18 UTC
Ok, in consideration, that it is no keyfeature for Q, I take this on
target 'Office later'.
Comment 8 lcn 2003-10-25 02:18:10 UTC
From 2003-10-21, MathML 2.0 Second Edition is a W3C recommandation.

Issue 10284 and Issue 13657 are not duplicated ?
Comment 9 thomas.lange 2006-09-25 11:28:33 UTC
.
Comment 10 Daiwe01 2013-02-13 21:41:27 UTC
OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 Section 1.3 lists Mathematical Markup Language (MathML) Version 2.0 (Second Edition), http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-MathML2-20031021/, W3C, 2003. as a Normative Reference.
Support for MathML 2.0 is not included Apache OpenOffice.
Comment 11 Daiwe01 2013-02-15 16:37:23 UTC
A post from the Apache OpenOffice Community Forum today indicates a need/desire by users who write "real math":
http://forum.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=59659&sid=7207fef996b8457da5df8b4068e00ff1#p264087