Timeline for Seeing math when viewing abstracts on arxiv.org [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2010 at 5:48 | comment | added | Anton Geraschenko | This feels off topic to me, but I can't really put my finger on why it shouldn't be on MO. I've started a discussion at tea.mathoverflow.net/discussion/363 | |
| Apr 23, 2010 at 21:40 | comment | added | Charles Stewart | Now on SO: stackoverflow.com/questions/2701841/… | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 21:11 | history | closed |
François G. Dorais Tom Leinster S. Carnahan♦ Mariano Suárez-Álvarez Andrew Stacey |
off topic | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 21:11 | answer | added | Andrew Stacey | timeline score: 5 | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 14:44 | comment | added | Theo Johnson-Freyd | superuser.com is a better site than here for this question. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 7:06 | comment | added | Dror Speiser | You can add the preamble into jsMath (in the macros section I believe). Bandwidth is not an issue - the browser downloads the library practically only once. And finally, making a Firefox addon that does this is simple, and I take on the challenge to do it during passover. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 6:54 | comment | added | Kevin Buzzard | FWIW I've noticed that most LaTeX in ArXiv abstracts tends to have undefined macros in! That makes the problem much harder. You typically get things like "Consider the curve \$ \C:y^2=x^3+1 \$ . In \cite{BSD} it was conjectured that...". You're never going to be rendering this in your browser ;-) (unless your browser reads the preamble of the TeX source before processing the abstract!) | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 5:03 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | The bandwidth issue could be "solved" by having google incorporate jsMath in their Google AJAX Libraries API, so that they serve jsMath. This would probably not hurt MO, and people using it from the beaches of Copacabana! | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 4:38 | comment | added | Kim Morrison | I'd also suggest contacting the arXiv directly, via [email protected], but I'm almost certain they won't be interested: they're very concerned by accessibility and bandwidth issues, and jsMath isn't exactly helping in these regards. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 4:35 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | The best way to attract the attention of those in charge of the archive is to contact them! | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 4:17 | comment | added | algori | Francois -- this post may be off-topic, but it may be helpful for the community, since it may attract the attention of those in charge of the archive. On the other hand I do wish there were an alternative to jsmath given the amount of bugs. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 4:17 | comment | added | Reid Barton | I have not tried to do this myself, but one ought to be able to accomplish this with a Greasemonkey script. You might ask on meta.MO, simply because much discussion of jsMath already goes on there. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 3:14 | comment | added | François G. Dorais | (I hadn't seen your addition when I wrote the above. Your second item is along the lines of my proposed variation. I suggest you follow up with another question.) | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 3:11 | comment | added | François G. Dorais | This is a very borderline case in my opinion, but I'm voting to close as 'off topic' on the basis that this question should be addressed to the arXiv directly. (Addressing it here will serve no purpose as far as I can tell.) I would be fine with a variation on the following instead. Is there a user-side method to render latex formulas on arbitrary websites? | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 | history | edited | VA. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
comments on commenters
|
| Mar 29, 2010 at 2:31 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | Well... hopefully, the author of a math paper speaks math-ese :P | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 2:20 | comment | added | Scott Carter | I have no vote on this MO question, but being an old school kind of a guy, I think abstracts should involve symbols minimally, if at all. An abstract should make sense in the common tongue of the author. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 1:38 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | -1 for not being particularly site-appropriate IMHO. Also: maybe I'm prejudiced by brief dalliance (in a former professional life) with web accessibility issues, but I'm not convinced there is a need to plaster JS cruft over everything. By their nature, abstracts cannot be too long, which usually limits the amount of LaTeX in them which one needs to parse; and if it looks like it might be interesting, then cutting, pasting and TeXing is not too arduous | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 1:29 | comment | added | François G. Dorais | Or the people at jsMath - math.union.edu/~dpvc/jsMath | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 1:25 | comment | added | Mariano Suárez-Álvarez | You should contact the arXiv people, really. | |
| Mar 29, 2010 at 1:21 | history | asked | VA. | CC BY-SA 2.5 |