Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Welcome to the staging ground for new communities! Each proposal has a description in the "Descriptions" category and a body of questions and answers in "Incubator Q&A". You can ask questions (and get answers, we hope!) right away, and start new proposals.

Are you here to participate in a specific proposal? Click on the proposal tag (with the dark outline) to see only posts about that proposal and not all of the others that are in progress. Tags are at the bottom of each post.

Comments on Should proposals all have MathJax or none have MathJax?

Parent

Should proposals all have MathJax or none have MathJax?

+5
−0

Some Codidact communities have MathJax enabled, while others do not. Each community decides whether they want MathJax based on weighing up the advantages and disadvantages.

However, Codidact Proposals has to make this decision once for all proposed communities. Currently MathJax is switched on for all proposals. This causes problems for some communities, most notably those that have reason to use the dollar sign ($), such as Finance and Accounting. This could be solved by switching off MathJax, but that would remove it for all the other proposals, some of which get significant benefit from it, such as Machine Learning, AI Tech, and Artificial Life.

The difficulties caused when trying to use more than one literal dollar sign ($) in a post are highlighted by an example post on the development server. A single dollar sign in a post is displayed as a dollar sign, but a second dollar sign later in the same paragraph will result in everything between the two being interpreted as MathJax (dollar signs disappear, text between is displayed in a different font, in italics, with all spaces stripped out). This can be suppressed with a double backslash before the first dollar sign, but most users will not know that, especially for a community that does not use MathJax. Worse, when there are more than two dollar signs in a paragraph, each needs a different number of backslashes to suppress MathJax, with no apparent pattern (see the example post linked at the start of this paragraph).

How should we resolve this problem?

  • Switch off MathJax for all proposals?
  • Keep MathJax for all proposals and accept the difficulty?
  • Introduce guidance for communities that have MathJax enabled (including Codidact Proposals)?
  • Implement a fix so that MathJax no longer behaves so unpredictably with multiple dollar signs in a paragraph?

Are there any other options? Is there a way to enable MathJax only for certain proposal tags?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

mattermost as reference (1 comment)
Post
+0
−1

MathJax should be enabled everywhere. Many communities either need it or will need it. It's tedious to ask for it every time, and then when it's added, to go back and edit dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of questions which used some crude backtick syntax to make do in absence of MathJax.

What is the reason for not adding anyway? I assumed that Stack sites either added as a retrofit long after the site was created, and/or they had to pay for some MathJax service and didn't want to bother adding native support. I'd like to think we are in a more enlightened place here :) and these don't apply.

You would have a better argument for making backticks for code optional than MathJax. Mathematical notation has much broader relevance in life than code (I say this as a professional software developer and lifelong keen hacker). Virtually everyone learns math in primary school, but most people do not know how to code. And if I had to choose between more people knowing math and more people knowing to code, I would choose math any day even though I dislike math and love coding (and it's not just to reduce job competition! :D).

This causes problems for some communities, most notably those that have reason to use the dollar sign ($), such as Finance and Accounting.

True. But of all the Stack sites I've used, if I had to name one site that doesn't support MathJax that I really, really wish it did, it would be Finance hands down.

It's unfortunate that Knuth did not pick a better syntax for TeX, and then the problem was perpetuated into Markdown by the creators of MathJax. It is indeed annoying when trying to describe currencies.

Why don't we use $$ for inline Math (Latex $) and $$$ (when on its own line) for the display math (TeX $$)? MathJax users will know to try $$ when $ doesn't work, and $$$ at least recalls ``` for code. Plus we could just add them to the little footer below the edit box.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

3 comment threads

Mathjax is slow (5 comments)
Please don't invent yet another syntax (3 comments)
Changing the syntax sounds promising (3 comments)
Please don't invent yet another syntax
samcarter‭ wrote over 1 year ago

A big problem on LaTeX Q&A sites are users who come from a mathjax background and don't understand that mathjax only emulates a subset of LaTeX syntax and think they can simply use their mathjax code in LaTeX. If they use $$...$$ for their formula, they will at least get some result, albeit with poor spacing. If they try your proposed syntax, they will have to understand and debug the errors.

matthewsnyder‭ wrote over 1 year ago · edited over 1 year ago

The reason people say inventing syntax is bad, is because usually syntax has a lot of rules and it takes much effort to learn.

In this case, I am proposing a trivial syntax change. It is literally changing a single element, and using one more of a symbol that everyone knows to otherwise collide with prose text. Also, there is overlap with "assumed syntax" in that if people blindly use $$ it will still work (I am saying go from $ and $$ to $$ and $$$). Moreover, there is a reminder about syntax below every textbox, and it's hard to see why people would be confused when they see it right there.

The Markdown spec, vague as it is, does not actually mention math at all. So by adding MathJax, you are already defining "yet another syntax".

matthewsnyder‭ wrote over 1 year ago

Also, this is not even a "new syntax" vs. MathJax. MathJax supports custom delimiters. See other comment.

You do have a point that it is syntax different from a popular misunderstanding of what MathJax is.