Re: [xml] What is the best way to implement semantics?

John J. Boyer wrote:

On Wed, 26 May 2004, Bruce Miller wrote:


Anyway, a quick google suggests that Daisy is designed exactly for this,
but I'm not sure what implementing Docbook directly buys you.
Docbook is a good model for some kinds of documents but a bad match to others,
so you'd end up with a questionable translation to Docbook.
Why not transform all document types, including Docbook, to Daisy and working
with that?

I understand that Daisy does not yet support math. Are there other xml formats than docbook that are widely used for technical material?

Does docbook now (directly) support Math?
The usual route seems to be to create a hybrid dtd/scheme using
namespaces or whatever in order to include MathML, such as with

I'm not at all familiar with Daisy, so I don't know what they do for math.
I would think that there would be big, interesting issues with translating
MathML (or any other variant) into something useful for a braille interface.
It would probably be worth doing something modular that can be used from
within other document types that might also include MathML.


bruce miller nist gov

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