[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: [fricas-devel] mathml patch

From: Arthur Ralfs
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: [fricas-devel] mathml patch
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 12:40:14 -0800

----- Original Message -----
From: Waldek Hebisch <address@hidden>
Date: Sunday, December 16, 2007 12:11 pm
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Re: [fricas-devel] mathml patch
To: address@hidden
Cc: address@hidden

> > Hi Tim, Waldek,<br><br>This patch covers a few typos in
> the documentation
> > and the correction for<br>"continuedFraction(3,repeating
> [1], repeating
> > [3,6])".
> > Waldek your patch<br>for this one missed the last "ZAG" in
> the case of
> > a finite continued fraction<br>and replaced it with an ellipsis.
> > I've added a test to see if the last argument<br>is a ZAG
> or an ellipsis.
> > If neither then I give an error but still deliver
> valid<br>MathML, i.e.
> > the error is contained in an mtext element
> I am not sure why do you want to deliver valid MathML in this case.
> Namely, getting to formatZag with something else is a bug -- either
> in code genereting unexpected thing or in formatZag.  So,
> the output
> is incorrect anyway.  But if you only deliver text inside MathML
> it may easily be overlooked.
> In general, I feel that instead of guessing what given construct
> means you should just throw errors: once an unhandled construct
> appears it is easy to catch error in the debugger and find out
> what it means.  If you try to mask errors debugging becomes much
> harder...
That's OK with me.  Tim, what do you think?  My own thought was
that the text inside the MathML would stick out pretty conspicuously
but I don't have any objection to doing what you suggest.


> > Would you like this as a series of patches<br>or one big
> one at the end?
> > Or since the package may end up being largely<br>rewritten
> maybe I should
> > just send the rewritten package?
> I prefer small patches -- it makes discussing changes much easier.
> But if you fell that changes are mutually dependent then combining
> them is OK.
> --
>                               Waldek Hebisch
> address@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> Axiom-developer mailing list
> address@hidden
reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]