ContentMathML-extension-proposal.md

@@ -51,13 +51,14 @@ first comes out as `{a,b,c}` and the second as `set(a,b,c)` that is OK too.
 
 But it is always acceptable to render in prefix form. 
 
-Since many users of Strict are thinking in terms of lambda calculus expressions (e.g. for theorem provers), they will probably be happier if a sum of terms is rendered as `plus(1,2,3)` rather than `1+2+3` or if lambda terms is rendered as written rather than our guess of what a simplified rendering should be.
+Since many users of Strict are thinking in terms of lambda calculus expressions (e.g. for theorem provers), they will probably be happier if a sum of terms is rendered as `plus(1,2,3)` rather than `1+2+3` or if lambda terms are rendered as written rather than our guess of what a simplified rendering should be.
 
 
 
 ### Future features
 
 * localization -- see https://github.com/mathjax/MathJax/issues/695
+* prefer embedded Presentation MathML over the conversion. If an author makes the effort to add Presentation as annotation-xml, then MathJax should honor it.
 
 ### notes from a MathML test suite run