define the -likes in the spec? #221
Comments
|
Basically these are like saying "x = ...". That's the definition. Any
explanation of why runs into the problem the explanation may in some part
not fully convey all the details or may imply things that aren't true.
Would adding a sentence "mrow-like elements use the same layout algorithm
as mrow" help? That's a true statement, but elements such as "none" don't
take children, so a bit misleading about "none" and related elements
because there is nothing to layout. Does that sentence help or confuse you
when you look at the mrow-like elements?
Saying something like that for scripted and radical elements seems
pointless: "Scripted elements are elements that are laid out with scripts".
No new information there. Same for radical elements. Maybe what's obvious
to me is not obvious to someone who hasn't worked on this for 20 years.
Neil
…On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 11:59 AM Brian Kardell ***@***.***> wrote:
It strikes me reading the spec now that I had some trouble with
understanding this for a while, and I have heard some confusion from others
as well when we say things like "mrow-like". We list which elements are
mrow-like, but I can't find anywhere where we actually define what these
grouping mean. I'd like to suggest that in the spec, in section 2.1, just
after the list of elements - it seems like we are missing important words
explaining this? I don't have a concrete solution to this, but maybe I
could help if we agree that makes sense... Perhaps something to the effect
of
Many of these elements have common rendering qualities and interactions.
For ease of understanding, we often refer to the following 'groups' of
elements based on their rendering interactions.
- mrow-like elements are container elements which ... explain here...
the following elements are said to be 'mrow-like'
- same for scripted, radical ..... token?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#221>, or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALZM3AVUXCH7XC5XAKON6TRV2BBLANCNFSM4NZVZC4Q>
.
|
|
I mean... It's possible that you might just be "comfortable with it"? "How are they -like?" is my basic question and it seems a reasonable one. This came up on the CG call just last week - we said a new link element would be "row-like" and there was a question about if this affected whether it could have a shadow dom. Now, I answered this immediately with "no" because I understand in some very general terms at least, how it is (and isn't row-like). I'd suggest that this were very clear to everyone, the question wouldn't have been asked. Who would be more familliar with these terms than the group we had assembled? I would wager the answer is "practically no one" and that others would understand this less. But, idk... maybe. Just food for thought, I guess. Most of my own understanding of this comes from discussions with @fred-wang and reading the article that he wrote when there was some rework in WebKit... |
|
That's basically what Neil saying, these are just definitions for a list of MathML elements so it can be easily referenced. Especially for mrow-like, this list was duplicated everywhere in MathML3 and the places not kept in sync ; so the definition in MathML Core was a way to solve this problem. It has also be used informally I guess in implementations. If the name is an issue, we can just rename mrow-like to "grouping elements" (incidentally, I was told that "row" is not a good name if linebreaking is allowed...). Note that We can also do short sentences like in https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#phrasing-content ; but as Neil said this won't cover the whole concept and should just be understood as hints: grouping elements => elements that layout as a generic mathematical container. scripted elements => elements used to attach scripts to a mathematical expression. radical elements => elements used to draw a radical symbol around a mathematical expression. We don't define token elements in https://mathml-refresh.github.io/mathml-core/#mathml-elements-and-attributes because text elements => elements used to draw text in mathematical formulas. Finally, there is also space-like ; but this one is not a pure DOM concept, it requires to know in-flow children in addition to the tag name. So not sure we should move it to the top section. We can rename it "spacing elements" if -like is confusing. |
|
I think a thing like you said above is more or less exactly what I am looking for @fred-wang in that sec 2.1. Just something like this (which I realize is actually a number of proposals) would solve all those things nicely I think: I'm happy to try to work out a pull if that is more helpful, but as it seems there's a number of changes to this it seems best to not waste time on that unless we're ok with it. This (including breaking from old terms) seems worth it because in my very limited experience, this has been the topic of really a lot of conversation which is trying to ultimately just understand how they are and aren't -like. |
|
If you want a complete list in 2.1, then mtabe/mtr/mtd along with mfrac
need to be added to the list.
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
…On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:32 AM Brian Kardell ***@***.***> wrote:
I think a thing like you said above is more or less exactly what I am
looking for @fred-wang <https://github.com/fred-wang> in that sec 2.1.
Just something like this (which I realize is actually a number of
proposals) would solve all those things nicely I think:
Each element in HTML falls into zero or more categories that group elements with similar characteristics together. The following broad categories are used in this specification:
2.1.1 Kinds of content
* grouping elements => elements that layout as a generic mathematical container.
* scripted elements => elements used to attach scripts to a mathematical expression.
* radical elements => elements used to draw a radical symbol around a mathematical expression.
* text elements => elements used to draw text in mathematical formulas.
* spacing elements => elements which do not affect the mathematical meaning of the expressions in which they appear.
<maybe insert a nice diagram like https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#kinds-of-content >
I'm happy to try to work out a pull if that is more helpful, but as it
seems there's a number of changes to this it seems best to not waste time
on that unless we're ok with it. This (including breaking from old terms)
seems worth it because in my very limited experience, this has been the
topic of really a lot of conversation which is trying to ultimately just
understand how they are and aren't -like.
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#221 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALZM3HTAR74W24CAVJSWSDRV6KN5ANCNFSM4NZVZC4Q>
.
|
|
The idea was not to have a complete of categories (the list of complete elements is already provided) but just to introduce definitions of categories that are re-used elsewhere. |
|
I renamed "mrow-like" to "grouping element" as agreed in July 13, 2020 meeting. I don't know if an extra description is necessary, I think the 3 names are self-explanatory and as Neil said it's just a list definition. |
|
Doesn't seem to be anything left, so I'm closing this. |
It strikes me reading the spec now that I had some trouble with understanding this for a while, and I have heard some confusion from others as well when we say things like "mrow-like". We list which elements are mrow-like, but I can't find anywhere where we actually define what these grouping mean. I'd like to suggest that in the spec, in section 2.1, just after the list of elements - it seems like we are missing important words explaining this? I don't have a concrete solution to this, but maybe I could help if we agree that makes sense... Perhaps something to the effect of
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: