You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Now that blanks have evolved and we parse expressions including blanks, such as "/2", it's not clear that the current default and functionality of the matchBlanks attribute is the best. It currently defaults to false so that <answer>/2</answer> does not have any correct answers given that the target answer includes a blank. To allow "/2" be be correct, one must use <answer matchBlanks>/2</answer>.
Should the default of matchBlanks be changed to true? If so, should be change its behavior so that a single blank is not matched and every invalid math be validated equal to any other invalid math? Or, do we change how blanks work to distinguish them from invalid math? (That would presumably be ideal, but is it worth the time investment?)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Now that blanks have evolved and we parse expressions including blanks, such as "/2", it's not clear that the current default and functionality of the
matchBlanks
attribute is the best. It currently defaults tofalse
so that<answer>/2</answer>
does not have any correct answers given that the target answer includes a blank. To allow "/2" be be correct, one must use<answer matchBlanks>/2</answer>
.Should the default of
matchBlanks
be changed to true? If so, should be change its behavior so that a single blank is not matched and every invalid math be validated equal to any other invalid math? Or, do we change how blanks work to distinguish them from invalid math? (That would presumably be ideal, but is it worth the time investment?)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: