Dear list,
currently, HTML math output defaults to embedded MathML:
:MathML:
Embed math content as presentational MathML_.
Pro:
The W3C recommendation for math on the web.
Selfcontained documents (no JavaScript, no external downloads).
Con:
Docutil's latex2mathml converter supports only a small
subset of LaTeX syntax.
With the "html4css1" writer, the resulting HTML document does
not validate, as there is no DTD for MathML + XHTML
Transitional. However, MathMLenabled browsers will render it
fine.
To avoid generating invalid HTML, options are:
a) a different mathoutput default
b) a different HTML format.
We need a consensus/decision on how to procede.
Different mathoutput default
=============================
Sensible alternatives for the html4css1 writer are:
:MathJax:
Format math for display with MathJax_, a JavaScriptbased math
rendering engine that uses HTML/CSS, JavaScript, and unicode
fonts for highquality typesetting that is scalable and prints
at full resolution.
Pro:
Works 'out of the box' across multiple browsers and platforms.
Supports a large subset of LaTeX math commands and constructs
(see http://www.mathjax.org/docs/1.1/tex.html).
Con:
Requires an Internet connection or a local MathJax
installation.
:HTML:
Format math in standard HTML enhanced by CSS rules
Requires the ``math.css`` stylesheet (stored in the same
installationdependent directory as the `default stylesheet
If HTML output is chosen as default, the math.css stylesheet (~250 lines)
would need to be either
* included in the default style sheet
* autoloaded if a document needs math
different HTML format
=====================
The html_strict writer generates valid
XHTML + MathML::
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1 plus MathML 2.0//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/Math/DTD/mathml2/xhtmlmath11f.dtd">;
if the document contains math and mathoutput is MathML (which should be
kept as default for this writer).
The writer currently resides in the sandbox. It could be moved to the core,
if there is agreement on this beeing sensible.
Günter
