![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/49e63acb01f2ca80efce7eed08310ce8.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
nico wrote:
So, the behaviour should not be different when using an entity name and the corresponding unicode value. Imagine some XML tool processing an original XML mathml code containing an entity name, and simply expanding the entity according the MathML DTD. I think that processing the original and the expanded code should give the same result.
I just reread that bit, and you are right (of course you knew that already, sorry).
Unfortunately, the use of bare character entities makes it quite a bit harder to implement mathml. Essentially, the top-level mathml element would have to redefine (and remember, for embedded non-mathml) lots and lots of 'normal' tex stuff.
indeed (preprocessing such an xml doc makes sense then) somehow i got the impression that many of those standards are not written with an implementation in mind Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------