MathML 3.0 contains *parts* of Content Markup in the TR. if this is a living standard type of document, then OK. I can accept that it is still "in process".
It is Content Markup is kind of partially in and partially out. the tags are there in the pages, but not in the navigation. maybe the editor is trying to remove Content Markup from the document altogether? I am trying to figure out what he is doing.
browser developers are confused too. usually in the TRs all the tags are listed in the navigation.
there is no section for MathML that I can tell in the bug tracking service, and I don't know what heading to put it under. sorry folks. just a user/dev hoping to help.
mglyph and semantics is one of those (actually, semantics doesn't look right, doesn't have angle brackets).
Errors in the MathML specification should be reported to the firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list rather than this HTML WG bugzilla. If you post there we'll try to clarify any issues that you raise. Currently your query isn't at all clear.
Chapter 3 of the MathML REC does contain a full description of Content MathML, the schema for MathML isalmost entirely mechanically extracted from the syntax tables in the REC.
It is true that the section title
Attribution via semantics
could perhaps have been called
Attribution via <semantics>
is that your issue?
This Bugzilla component is scoped to the HTML5 specification. Please direct any feedback you have for the MathML spec to the email@example.com list, as described by David.