Extensible definition dictionary about xaml-math

[alexreg]

This might be a reason to get rid of the DSL and define the operators using a builder-syntax in-code... haven't thought it through fully though.

[ForNeVeR]

I think that's a separate issue. When planning this, I thought that we could simply split our XML definitions (e.g. PredefinedTexFormulas.xml) to multiple files and load them on demand (for example, pass resource names to TexFormulaParser constructor or something like this).

I'm not sure if we'll ever want to completely replace all our PredefinedTexFormulas with C# code, but some additional flexibility perhaps wouldn't hurt.

[alexreg]

I don't think that's nearly as elegant, if I'm honest... keeping everything in code makes the extensibility aspect really easy.

[ForNeVeR]

Alright, let's think about that a little more.

I'd like to settle things like this before releasing the "stable" version 1.0, that should have a stable and extensible API we won't accidentally break.

[alexreg]

Agreed. I know abandoning the XML definition format may seem like a bit of a waste now, but I think it could be the optimal way forward, especially as far as extensibility is concerned. The DSL could grow to unwieldy proportions otherwise...