[tei-council] permit <hi> in <formula>?

[Sebastian Rahtz]

On 12 Nov 2011, at 15:46, Lou Burnard wrote:

> It would be convenient to expand this to include model.hiLike since 
> formulae often include things like "superscript x" for values of x for 
> which no character exists in Unicode (and there quite a few of them). 
> <hi rend="superscript">x</hi> though verbose is a bit easier to remember 
> than &#xABCD; for most values of ABCD

I'd have some doubts about that, and want someone like David
Carlisle to comment. If you want to do maths, use MathML
(or TeX) - trying to mimic the presentation using (the equivalent of)
CSS is not going to get you very far. 

> The current state is that for most of them rng:text is the only
> permitted content. Maybe that should generally be macro.xText, and
> maybe macro.xText should include <hi> ?

didn't we go over this relatively recently?  my thoughts below

> 
> charName : rng:text
its a formal name a la Unicode, so thats right
> code  : rng:text
problematic. I might be convinced there 
> eg : rng:text
ditto

> egXML : rng:text | macro.anyXML
thats an interesting one.  the ramifications scare me,
I'd steer clear

> formula : text | model.graphicLike
not convinced

> g : rng:text
by definition, not, surely

> gi : rng:text
ditto. the content of <gi> is an NCNAME

> glyphName : rng:text
as charNam above?

> idno : macro.xtext
can you come up with an example? possible, I agree

> ident : rng:text
didnt we specify this as really much like an NCNAME?

> localName : rng:text
cant remember what this :-{

> pc  :  rng:text | model.gLike | c
hmm, conceivably

> unicodeName : rng:text


surely not, by definition. Unicode dont use superscripts or the like in their names.
--
Stormageddon Rahtz      
Head of Information and Support Group, Oxford University Computing Services
13 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 6NN. Phone +44 1865 283431

Sólo le pido a Dios
que el futuro no me sea indiferente