MathJax Compiler in LaTex
Philip Taylor (Hellenic Institute)
P.Taylor at Hellenic-Institute.Uk
Sat Feb 5 18:06:02 CET 2022
Olivier Nicole wrote:
> [...] I simply used this as an argument to say that it stands to
> reason that the implementation of MathJax must be different from that
> of TeX, since it has to support a different set of primitive constructs.
I respectfully disagree. Which is not to suggest that I believe that
the implementation of MathJax is necessarily the same as that of TeX (I
have no idea whether it is or not), merely that I challenge the
assertions on which I believe your argument to is based.
For a start, why do you assert that "[MathJax] has to support a
different set of primitive constructs" ? Why must they be /primitive/
constructs ? If MathJax were/is the same as that of TeX, then those
constructs could be handled by a format file.
As to "the MathML specification describes a few mathematical elements
that, in (La)TeX, would require to use a dedicated package", there would
be no requirement for "a dedicated package" at all — a competent (La)TeX
programmer could write code to handle those elements without needing any
The defence rests.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the texhax