Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Reading/Functional and beautiful math for everyone

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Random proposal ►

◄ Back to Reading  The survey has concluded. Here are the results!


  • Problem:The math extension has a lot of bugs, missing features and deficiencies due to the output being images rather than text-like. Most math related websites like math.stackexchange.com use "MathJax out of the box" and do not have these problems. Re-submission of Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Reading/Functional and beautiful math for everyone
  • Who would benefit: Readers and editors of mathematical articles, books etc.
  • Proposed solution: In a commission of interested volunteers we came up with a road-map to remove the problematic conversion of "texvc" to standard LaTeX syntax. For a state-of-the-art rendering system we also need to improve the output format. Making it more like "MathJax out of the box" might need additional infrastructure (e.g. to supply web-fonts), needs a long-term maintenance concept and has to work together with almost all software components, so we would like WMF staff to help us.
  • More comments:
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T195861
  • Proposer: Debenben (talk) 19:29, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • An example of missing mathematical notation is that required for actuarial functions. See phab:T175673 . -Stelio (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Voting[edit]

@Bestoernesto: Why oppose? Do you have concerns regarding the roadmap or because you think the other wishes here are more important than providing a math extension that works properly?--Debenben (talk) 19:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)