LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for TEI-L Archives


TEI-L Archives

TEI-L Archives


TEI-L@LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEI-L Home

TEI-L Home

TEI-L  January 2018

TEI-L January 2018

Subject:

Referring to custom glyphs/chars from MathML

From:

"Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex

Date:

Mon, 8 Jan 2018 09:37:57 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (257 lines)

tl;dr

– For TEI projects that contain (many and/or extensive) formulas with 
custom mathematical symbols, we recommend to declare these symbols using 
the TEI elements <char> or <glyph>, even when the symbols only appear 
within MathML.
– For establishing the connection between the MathML symbols in formulas 
and their declarations, we recommend to use @xlink:href (for MathML 2) 
or @href (for MathML 3).
– If the symbols in the formulas have content (private use area 
character or image), add Schematron to ensure that these representations 
correspond to the respective representations in the linked declarations.

What follows is more like a comment than a question ;-) We found few 
references to MathML in the list archives, which tells us that encoding 
mathematical formulas does not seem to be a key component of most 
digital humanities projects. But when it is, it might well involve 
encoding symbols for which no Unicode representation exists.

We (textloop and le-tex) want to share which encoding recommendations we 
arrived at for a current project. And of course we are soliciting 
feedback from the list.

So here we go:

We are converting math-heavy volumes of a text-critical edition of 
Leibniz’s works from LaTeX to TEI. We intend to encode the formulas as 
(presentational) MathML:

Unless another vocabulary seems more appropriate (for example for 
encoding equations that can be consumed by computer algebra systems), we 
recommend using presentational MathML as formula notation. One part of 
this consideration is that we want to have an XML representation (and 
not an unparsed string-only format such as TeX/LaTeX/AMSTeX) so that we 
be able to actually link from a single symbol in a formula to its 
declaration. The case for presentational MathML is the tool support and 
its unchallenged role as the go-to math format in publishing. Compared 
to other XML vocabulary candidates such as, say, SVG, presentational 
MathML conveys at least some mathematical meaning.

Leibniz invented some mathematical operators that didn’t make it into 
Unicode yet. The typesetters used custom LaTeX macros for each of these 
symbols, and the macros ultimately resolve to including images.

We are now thinking about how to encode these symbols in a TEI 
customizing that incorporates MathML. The use of these symbols is 
confined to contexts in which we can use MathML exclusively, instead of 
TEI-native vocabulary. On the other hand, the formulas can be so complex 
that they cannot be appropriately encoded with TEI-native markup.

So in principle we can use MathML’s mglyph element that, by means of its 
@src attribute, will refer to the corresponding image. mglyph’s alt 
attribute may contain the LaTeX macro name so this mapping information 
will still be available when converting the TEI XML to LaTeX in the 
future. (We will most likely invert the production process for future 
volumes, going from TEI to LaTeX rather than the other way round).

However, we think it is potentially more expressive, more flexible, and 
less redundant to use TEI’s <glyph> or <char> elements to declare these 
symbols in a central place. Then the question arises how we can point to 
the declarations, given that MathML elements such as <mo> don’t have a 
dedicated TEI-pointer-like attribute such as [log in to unmask]

Candidates are @xlink:href and @xref. The latter is rarely used. It was 
designed to link between presentational and content MathML elements in 
parallel markup. It is declared as an IDREF in the schema which makes it 
difficult to point to a declaration that is stored in a different file. 
@xlink:href, on the other hand, is declared to be able to hold arbitrary 
content, in particular URLs that can point to the glyph definitions.

So an empty <mo> element with @xlink:href pointing to the glyph 
declaration would be a good candidate.

The glyph could be declared as:

<glyph xml:id="pleibvdash">
   <glyphName>pleibvdash</charName>
   <desc>a dagger &#x2020; with a horizontal line on the left-hand side 
of its stem, or a double dagger &#x2021; without the lower right-hand 
horizontal line.</desc>
   <mapping type="PUA">&#xE212;</mapping>
   <mapping type="tex">\pleibvdash</mapping>
   <graphic url="pm.pdf"/>
   <graphic url="pm.svg"/>
</glyph>


There are two concerns though. The first is that we are considering 
using MathML 3 instead of MathML 2. In MathML 3, the attribute is called 
@href instead of @xlink:href, and its semantics seem to have shifted 
towards actual hyperlinking (instead of unspecified linking mechanisms 
as in MathML 2). This seems to be a minor concern. I don’t think that 
Leibniz or the critical edition editors will start using hyperlinks on 
math symbols any time soon. And if they do, they will be able to use the 
<maction> element in order to make their hyperlinking intent 
unambiguous. If we document the use and rendering expectation of @href 
on <mo> and <mi> in our encoding description, everything should be fine.


An obvious TEI-centric solution would be to allow <g>’s tei.pointer 
attribute @ref also on <mo> in our customization. We cannot pursue this 
approach though because the resulting XML needs to validate against 
tei_allPlus.rng, too (or to an otherwise unaltered tei_allPlus-like 
customization that includes MathML 3 instead of MathML 2). This has been 
stipulated by the editor/publisher.


The second concern is about renderability of the custom symbols in TEI 
viewers and MathML editing tools. The issue is that MathML renderers and 
equation editors won’t be able to properly display an <mo> that has no 
content, but only a custom link to a TEI element instead. (It would at 
best provide a hyperlink that may or may not take you to the declaration 
in the TEI file.)

For the purpose of HTML or LaTeX→PDF renderings, we can always look up 
the appropriate image URL or LaTeX macros in the char/glyph declaration 
and transform the source MathML to another MathML that contains an 
<mglyph src="…"/> element or to LaTeX code, as described below in 
greater detail. (Yes, the detail will become even greater further down 
this posting, dear reader.)

However, when we switch to a TEI-first workflow in the future, someone 
needs to type the equations, probably not as raw XML, but with a visual 
MathML editor. (Although it is possible that the formulas will be 
written in LaTeX and converted to MathML using LaTeXML, as we are doing 
now.) Ideally this editor will provide a customizable symbol palette or 
a toolbar that can hold more complex MathML expressions. In any case, 
without a string value or an image to represent the symbol, it won’t 
display in the formulas that contain it.

So maybe instead of, or in addition to, linking to the glyph definition, 
we might give the <mo> element content, like this:

<mo>&#xE212;</mo>

or

<mo href="#pleibvdash">&#xE212;</mo>

(In order to be able to actually see the symbols, we’d need to patch the 
math font that the equation editor uses.)

The second variant is only supported by an equation editor whose toolbar 
can hold arbitrary MathML expressions, not just custom symbol 
characters. (Examples for these editors are MathType and Wiris Editor.) 
Such an equation editor is most probably able to insert a @href-only, 
otherwise empty, <mo>, although it might not offer a recognizable visual 
representation for it.

Alternatively, this visual representation can be achieved by including 
an <mglyph src="pm.svg"/> in the <mo>. So this would be a third variant:

<mo href="#pleibvdash"><mglyph src="pm.svg"/></mo>

Of course the second and third variants a bit redundant. You could look 
up the <glyph>, provided that it contains <mapping 
type="PUA">&#xE212;</mapping> and that no other <glyph> or <char> 
contains the same PUA mapping, by the string value only. Or you can look 
up the <glyph/> by the image file name.

However, linking by href is more explicit than matching by string value 
or image name, and therefore, despite the redundancy, we think that 
content should always be accompanied by an @href (@xlink:href for MathML 
2) connection.

Therefore, if an equation editor or a TEI viewer for proofreading must 
have content in <mo> in order to display the symbol in formulas, we will 
accept this redundancy.

It is then prudent to add these Schematron checks to the customization:
– Does the @href of an <mo> point to a <glyph> or <char> declaration?
– Is lookup by string content or image file name unambiguous?
– Does the looked-up declaration contain the same PUA string 
representation (or, in the case of images, does it contain a <graphic> 
whose @url matches the @src attribute of an <mglyph>)?

If the equation editor is only able to insert single-character strings 
(with some default <mo> or <mi> markup around them), the project should 
provide an XSLT transformation or an XML refactoring action that 
replaces this element with a properly @hrefed one.


There is another concern that is specific to <mo> elements (in contrast 
to <mi> elements). In MathML, operators may have properties, such as 
spacing to the left and to the right, or the ability to stretch so that 
their height matches the height of a mathematical term that they 
enclose/precede/follow. These properties are not expressed as XML 
attributes, they are rather included in an operator dictionary that is 
maintained by the MathML renderer. Lookup of the dictionary entries is 
by an <mo>’s string content and its position (infix, postfix, prefix) 
relative to the surrounding content, as determined by the MathML 
renderer. So if we want to be able to use this lookup mechanism, the 
<mo>s need to have content, rather than being empty elements that point 
to a declaration.

However, in practice, there is no way to inform a MathML renderer that 
there are new operator dictionary entries for the newly introduced 
symbols. We can nevertheless encode the spacing etc. values that should 
go into the operator dictionary, using TEI vocabulary within <glyph> or 
<char>:

   <charProp>
     <localName>mathOperatorInfixLeftSpace</localName>
     <value>mediummathspace</value>
   </charProp>
   <charProp>
     <localName>mathOperatorInfixRightSpace</localName>
     <value>mediummathspace</value>
   </charProp>
   <charProp>
     <localName>mathOperatorPrefixLeftSpace</localName>
     <value>0em</value>
   </charProp>
   <charProp>
     <localName>mathOperatorPrefixRightSpace</localName>
     <value>veryverythinmathspace</value>
   </charProp>

(these are the operator dictionary lspace/rspace values for common 
operators such as '+', '±', and '−', as recommended in 
https://www.w3.org/TR/MathML3/appendixc.html#oper-dict.entries-table).

It is expected that for HTML renderings, the MathML formulas will be 
slightly transformed so that the @href linking will be replaced with the 
SVG representation that is taken from the linked declaration. This 
transformation process might then, after analyzing whether the operator 
is used as a prefix, an infix or a postfix, insert explicit <mspace 
with="mediummathspace"/> spacers around <mo><mglyph src="pm.svg"/></mo> 
if the default spacing is not satisfactory. Likewise, required 
stretchiness of a custom fence operator might be achieved by scaling the 
SVG content to match the box size of the MathML expression that it 
delimits (haven’t tried though how to make this work in practice).

For PDF generation through LaTeX, we’d look up the LaTeX macros in the 
<glyph> declarations, and leave any spacing issues to the math operator 
declaration in the TeX styles.


This is our treatise on how to refer to custom symbols from MathML. Do 
you share the conclusions that we arrived at, or would you pursue a 
different approach?

Gerrit

-- 
Gerrit Imsieke
Geschäftsführer / Managing Director
le-tex publishing services GmbH
Weissenfelser Str. 84, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
Phone +49 341 355356 110, Fax +49 341 355356 510
[log in to unmask], http://www.le-tex.de

Registergericht / Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Leipzig
Registernummer / Registration Number: HRB 24930

Geschäftsführer: Gerrit Imsieke, Svea Jelonek, Thomas Schmidt

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994
June 1994
May 1994
April 1994
March 1994
February 1994
January 1994
December 1993
November 1993
October 1993
September 1993
August 1993
July 1993
June 1993
May 1993
April 1993
March 1993
February 1993
January 1993
December 1992
November 1992
October 1992
September 1992
August 1992
July 1992
June 1992
May 1992
April 1992
March 1992
February 1992
January 1992
December 1991
November 1991
October 1991
September 1991
August 1991
July 1991
June 1991
May 1991
April 1991
March 1991
February 1991
January 1991
December 1990
November 1990
October 1990
September 1990
August 1990
July 1990
June 1990
April 1990
March 1990
February 1990
January 1990

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.BROWN.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager