Re: MathJax problem with \gdef

[Patrice Dumas]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 03:42:10PM +0100, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> Another problem that crops up is that users cannot write  the following
> code enclosed in @tex.  Users will have to add @math for every inline
> expression, cluttering the code sustantially.  

It seems to me that @math{} is ok for inline expressions, it does not
clutter substantially the code.  It is not really possible to use single
characters as aliases for @-commands in Texinfo, and I do not think that
we should do that.  I guess that it is possible to shorthen with an
@alias or a @macro, to @m{} instead of @math{}.

> Perhaps we can add an
> additional construct to allow inline math expressions together with text.
> What do you think?

> 
>  @tex
>   The traces identified by $\VPht\overline{R}_l(t)$ (black) demonstrate
>   the improvement in the Microseismic Signal Level of the stacked
>   waveforms as the amount of seismic data builds up.  The averaging
>   period is shown next to each trace representing the estimated Green
>   Function.  $\VPht\overline{R}_l(t)$ represents the Standard Coherence
>   Average measured by using the classical Coherence Average [BR07]
>   @FtNote{Bensen@comma{} Ritzwoller et al.@: (2007): Processing seismic
>   ambient noise data to obtain reliable broad-band surface wave
>   dispersion measurements.}@ref{bibl--Bensen--Ritzwoller--etAl--2007,,
>   Bensen@comma{} Ritzwoller et al.@: (2007)}.
> @end tex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 1:35 PM
> > From: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> > To: "Patrice Dumas" <pertusus@free.fr>
> > Cc: "help-texinfo gnu" <help-texinfo@gnu.org>
> > Subject: Re: MathJax problem with \gdef
> >
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 1:15 PM
> > > From: "Patrice Dumas" <pertusus@free.fr>
> > > To: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> > > Cc: "help-texinfo gnu" <help-texinfo@gnu.org>
> > > Subject: Re: MathJax problem with \gdef
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:57:47AM +0100, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> > > > Have done more tests with @tex, @math, and @displaymath.
> > > >
> > > > \gdef is working for pdf output but not with MathJax.
> > >
> > > I am not an expert in MathJax, but I think that MathJax only interpret
> > > the LaTeX/TeX locally, so cannot know about \Desig and will only
> > > interpret LaTeX/TeX "primary" commands.  Maybe there is a possibility to
> > > give some TeX/LaTeX code to MathJax?  In addition, when outputting html,
> > > @tex blocks are ignored.
> >
> > Correct, at present we neglect @tex.  This requirement complicates the 
> > problem
> > because we cannot simply use @math and @displaymath.  Furthermore, 
> > @displaymath
> > only outputs one expression, whereas in @tex, one can have multiple $$math$$
> > constructs.
> >
> >
> > > I checked with latex2html and tex4ht.  The idea with latex2html and tex4ht
> > > is that there are intermediary files with the @tex, @math and
> > > @displaymath put in those files and then those files are run through
> > > latex2html or tex4ht and then the html fragment from each of the
> > > @-commands are put in the final output.  For latex2html the @tex and
> > > @math and @displaymath are all put in the same file, so it works (though
> > > I have not checked if the order is kept as in the input file).  For
> > > tex4ht the @tex, @math and @displaymath are each in a different file, so
> > > this does not work.  Maybe the code could be changed to handle that
> > > case and try to put everything in the same file using the order of the
> > > Texinfo file..
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 11:46 AM
> > > > > From: "Christopher Dimech" <dimech@gmx.com>
> > > > > To: "help-texinfo gnu" <help-texinfo@gnu.org>
> > > > > Subject: MathJax problem with \gdef
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Have noticed a problem with including \gdef names in @math,
> > > > > possibly introduced after the MathJax implementation. Defining
> > > > > \Desig and calling it from @math{} fails.  It also fails when
> > > > > doing output to pdf.
> > > > >
> > > > > @tex
> > > > >   \gdef\Desig{\buildrel \rm def \over \equiv}
> > > > > @end tex
> > > > >
> > > > > @math{\Desig}
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >