This is an archive of past discussions with User:RandomDSdevel. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The mathematics manual of style permits articles to use either HTML math, or LaTeX math with the <math> tag. The style that is already used in an article should generally be preserved. Please don't convert form one to the other unless there is some specific reason, as both styles are equally acceptable and there is no official preference towards either one. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
But HTML math is so much more confusing and less flexible than LaTeX! Why would the latter not be preferred over it?
Neither is preferred in any official way. Each method has its adherents and detractors. The main disadvantage of LaTeX is that the font is so different from the normal font, in size, quality, and weight. The HTML math, when it works, generally has a much more pleasant appearance. And for simple math such as x=2, the flexibility of LaTeX is not very helpful. Logged-in editors can control the appearance of math somewhat but logged-out editors have no way to affect it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Then why haven't the guys in charge of coding Wikipedia's MediaWiki-based software changed the default font settings used inside the wiki's '<math>…</math>' tags to match those used by normal text?
The math is rendered into PNG images by software called texvc, which is (1) ancient and (2) written in OCAML which none of the active developers is fluent in. At the same time, at least some developers think the math is "good enough". They would argue that only a tiny proportion of articles use <math> in the first place, and the current system has the advantage of not using Javascript. More recently there was some talk of replacing texvc entirely with MathJax, but it hasn't happened yet and some dvs oppose it because it requires Javascript. So, basically, there is little chance that the existing system will be changed unless it is replaced entirely, and even that is not extremely likely. Personally, I think that converting to MathJax would be a great improvement, but at the moment we have to live with what we have. This has some up on the mathematics wikiproject talk page a few times, if you want to look in the archives. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
You don't happen to remember which parts of the Mathematics WikiProject's archives these kinds of posts would be in would you? If you don't, that's fine since I was wondering if I could save myself the trouble of sorting through these archives; I'll just look through them myself.
