On Jul 12, 2010, at 11:01 AM, Beth Dakin wrote: > > On Jul 10, 2010, at 1:17 AM, Alex Milowski wrote: > >> I would think we'd close it when we've actually completely implemented >> MathML. > > If this is what you want the bug to represent, then it does make sense to > keep all feature-implementation bugs related to this master bug, but none of > the bug bugs…if that makes any sense.The bug bugs should be in the MathML > component, but they shouldn't block the feature-complete bug. > >> Just >> enabling it seems like something we could do now but our implementation is >> quite impoverished with respect to MathML 3.0. > > I think we should consider enabling MathML. Just because we don't have MathML > 3.0 implemented yet doesn't mean we need to keep it off; there was a time > when we didn't have any CSS 3 implemented, but that didn't mean our CSS > implementation had to be turned off! I have been playing around with a > MathML-enabled build, and I feel like we do a pretty good job getting a lot > of MathML on the web right, and I haven't experienced any crashes in the > MathML code either. And if we turn it on, more people will test it, and that > is just plain helpful. Just my opinion!
I think it's fine to enable MathML soon, as long as we make sure of the following: 1) Using a MathML-enabled build shouldn't cause stability problems or functional or performance regressions when browsing ordinary non-MathML content. 2) We should try to do some fuzz testing to verify that MathML doesn't create security risks. #2 can happen after we enable MathML, but should probably happen before anyone ships it. Regards, Maciej _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
