Re: [Texmacs-dev] Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: [xml-litprog-l] Re: noweb, pamphlets, and TeXmacs

[Joris van der Hoeven]

> Quite how useful graphical manipulation of mathematics is is
> questionable,

For people who got brainwashed by *TeX/*ML, maybe,
but I do not think that this is a philosophical subject
for most other users.

> > I indeed think that the whole system MathML/Openmath is more complex
> > than necessary.
> Well that depends what you want to do, other people say that they are
> not sophisticated enough for formal applications.  For what I want to do
> they're about right ;-)
> 
> >                 Also, it has mainly been developed with rendering
> > in mind, not editing. I finally notice that Openmath does not seem
> ???  MathML presentation is by definition about presentation.  OpenMath
> and MathML-content are about semantics which is what you need in a piece
> of mathematical software.
> 
> > to work very well.
> In what sense?

I'm not going to start a flamewar on this and I will wait for an occasion
(and time) to write a detailed article with my opinions about this matter.

At the moment, I am just interested in investigating what
is missing in TeXmacs to make it a good frontend for Axiom and
maybe a good environment for litterate programming and integrated help.
I have made clear what we can do in that direction: compatability with
MathML and something like Anthony's markup language for the litterate
programming. If Bill Page is willing to do some of the programming,
then that would be great. If you prefer other tools, like Mozilla,
Leo, or I don't know what, fine too, but please tell us so as soon
as possible.