LaTeX Why are MathJax images not displaying on my webpage?

[Greg Bernhardt]

thanks for breaking the page borek ;)

 

[Borek]

I don't remember why there are \textrm here, that's just copy/pasted from somewhere else. Where does the red come from?

 

[Mapes]

Looks like any error in the code shows up as red. That's neat, and nicer than the "cannot render" box before.

Test: \epsilon\mathrm{,}\ \varepsilon\mathrm{,}\ \mu\mathrm{,}\ \upmu\mathrm{,}\ \mathbb{C}\mathrm{,}\ \mathtt{C}\mathrm{,}\ \mathsf{C}

 

[mishrashubham]

I think the new system is taking more time to render, although that must be because it is still undergoing testing.

 

[jhae2.718]

I don't remember why there are \textrm here, that's just copy/pasted from somewhere else. Where does the red come from?

Try putting a space between the \textrm's where there is red; I fixed the markup in the quote. Not sure why it works that way; it should work as is, but maybe it's something to do with the MathJax interpreter.

 

[cepheid]

Sorry if this is known already, but this LaTeX output doesn't work on the mobile version of the site. At least, that's true when running the Safari app in iOS 4. All I see is the LaTeX source code instead.

 

[jhae2.718]

Sorry if this is known already, but this LaTeX output doesn't work on the mobile version of the site. At least, that's true when running the Safari app in iOS 4. All I see is the LaTeX source code instead.

I see LaTeX fine on iOS 4.3. Posted from my iPad.

 

[Mark44]

What browser are you using? I would think in a current version of FF or Chrome that the JS processing would be slightly faster than downloading images.

Sorry, I meant to include that info but forgot. I'm using IE 8.

I see small status boxes in the lower left corner that say things like Processing math 38%, and loading some font.

 

[jhae2.718]

...I'm using IE 8...

You should use a better browser.

 

[Fredrik]

Please don't fix what's not broken!

Why the sudden change?

You guys should search the feedback forum for threads with the word "latex" in the title. The LaTeX feature is definitely broken, and the change isn't at all sudden. LaTeX previews haven't worked properly for more than a year. I think there are at least 30 threads about it. The move to MathJax has been discussed in public at least since February. The admins probably started talking about it long before that.

Sorry to say I really hate the new look. The images are smaller, and arew just ugly compared to the old font. Please bring back imgtex =)

Give the admins some time to work things out. If it still looks ugly when they say that they're done, then you can start whining about it.

Not having any problems with Diazona's post anymore.

It's still completely messed up for me. I assume we're talking about #38. It looks fine until I put my mouse pointer over a math expression, and then stuff disappears, including plain text below the quote box.

 

[jhae2.718]

Yes, #38. What browser/platform are you on?

 

[cepheid]

I see LaTeX fine on iOS 4.3. Posted from my iPad.

Hmm, yes, but are you looking at the full or the mobile version of the site? I'm looking at the mobile version. I think my iOS version is 4.2.1, and I'm running it on an iPhone 3G.

 

[Fredrik]

I'm using Firefox 4.0.1 on Windows 7 SP1.

This is a post I wrote some time ago that contains a lot of math. I'm having similar problems with that. Another weird thing is that that link should automatically scroll to post #13, but for some reason that doesn't quite work.

One of the math expressions in that post doesn't show up at all. I don't see anything wrong with the latex code when I click quote, but mathjax displays it as if I had typed "\rang le" instead of "\rangle". This is the second line with only math after the line that starts with the word "Define".

I just tried Internet Explorer. With IE, I don't have the problem that stuff disappears when I put my mouse pointer over a math expression, but that specific line I mentioned is still messed up. Hm, maybe I don't have matching tex and itex tags...I'll check. IE also fails to scroll down to post #13.

Edit: No, I don't see any problems with the tex/itex tags. This is the line that MathJax doesn't seem to understand:

\phi(x)=\left\langle\frac{z}{\|z\|^2},x\right\rangle

\phi(x)=\left\langle\frac{z}{\|z\|^2},x\right\rangle

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I'm using Firefox 4.0.1 on Windows 7 SP1.

This is a post I wrote some time ago that contains a lot of math. I'm having similar problems with that. Another weird thing is that that link should automatically scroll to post #13, but for some reason that doesn't quite work.

I'm using Chrome 12 and all the math on that page appears to render fine. I'll test with FF 4.0.1

 

[micromass]

I'm having similar problems in Frederik's posts. I'm also using firefox, by the way...

 

[jhae2.718]

Hmm, yes, but are you looking at the full or the mobile version of the site? I'm looking at the mobile version. I think my iOS version is 4.2.1, and I'm running it on an iPhone 3G.

Full version.

I'm using Firefox 4.0.1 on Windows 7 SP1.

I have no problems with Firefox 4.0.1 on Linux.

\phi(x)=\left \langle \frac{z}{\|z\|^2}, x \right \rangle (jhae2.718: I've modified the TeX markup to the left)

\phi(x)=\left\langle\frac{z}{\|z\|^2},x\right\rangle

I've noticed the parser doesn't alway recognize things. Try putting spaces between commands, as I did in the quoted text above. The spacing on the displayed code is an artifact of vBulletin.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I'm having similar problems in Frederik's posts. I'm also using firefox, by the way...

hmm using Win7 FF 4.0.1 fred's post looks fine except for the one equation he mentioned

 

[jhae2.718]

Try installing the STIX fonts locally. I'll bet that both Greg and I have those, which is why we don't have problems.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Try installing the STIX fonts locally. I'll bet that both Greg and I have those, which is why we don't have problems.

Shouldn't have to do this, they are loaded from the mathjax server.

 

[jhae2.718]

While correlation \not = causation, I stopped having those problems after I installed the fonts. It's possible that there is some problem with the way FF4 treats the fontdata.js or the fonts when loaded from the server.

Let me try with FF4 in my W7 VM (which doesn't have the STIX fonts) and get back to you.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

While correlation \not = causation, I stopped having those problems after I installed the fonts. It's possible that there is some problem with the way FF4 treats the fontdata.js or the fonts when loaded from the server.

Let me try with FF4 in my W7 VM (which doesn't have the STIX fonts) and get back to you.

hmm I don't have STIX locally loaded and FF4 on W7 looks fine to me.

 

[jhae2.718]

Works fine for me in FF4.0.1 in Win 7 SP1 x86_64 under VirtualBox 4.0.8. No local STIX fonts, so it seems my guess was wrong.

 

[cepheid]

Full version.

Right, so I mean, that's exactly what I was reporting in the first place: that it doesn't work on the mobile version of the site.

 

[jhae2.718]

Right, so I mean, that's exactly what I was reporting in the first place: that it doesn't work on the mobile version of the site.

Sorry, didn't catch that.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Right, so I mean, that's exactly what I was reporting in the first place: that it doesn't work on the mobile version of the site.

I haven't added the code to the mobile skin.

 

[cepheid]

I haven't added the code to the mobile skin.

Got it, thanks.

 

[Fredrik]

I'm using Chrome 12 and all the math on that page appears to render fine. I'll test with FF 4.0.1

hmm using Win7 FF 4.0.1 fred's post looks fine except for the one equation he mentioned

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough that everything looks fine until I move my mouse pointer over a math expression.

 

[George Jones]

I just printed the thread

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=491078&highlight=speed,

and every "+", "-", "=", and integral sign (and possible other stuff) is missing

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Maybe I didn't make it clear enough that everything looks fine until I move my mouse pointer over a math expression.

Yes I see what you are saying now. It seems the equation disappears, depending on your zoom trigger, on anything above Theorem 2 in your post. I will send this to the devs and see what they say. thanks!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I just printed the thread

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=491078&highlight=speed,

and every "+", "-", "=", and integral sign (and possible other stuff) is missing

printed to a physical piece of paper? do they display fine in the thread?

 

[Fredrik]

By the way, the math looks much better in IE than in FF. I'd say that in IE, it looks the way I want it to look, while in FF it's too small, and there are weird spaces inserted in simple expressions like \|\phi\|=\|x_0\|.

 

[George Jones]

printed to a physical piece of paper?

Yes.

do they display fine in the thread?

Yes.

I used printer at work. When I get home, I will try printing on my home printer.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

By the way, the math looks much better in IE than in FF. I'd say that in IE, it looks the way I want it to look, while in FF it's too small, and there are weird spaces inserted in simple expressions like \|\phi\|=\|x_0\|.

This is a well known problem because of the differences in how IE and FF handle web fonts.

 

[micromass]

I just saw this point https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3309596#post3309596 and it's quite difficult to read because each equation starts on a new line.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I just saw this point https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3309596#post3309596 and it's quite difficult to read because each equation starts on a new line.

because the user didn't use itex

 

[micromass]

because the user didn't use itex

So you always need to use itex from now on? Before, just using tex didn't give you a new line...

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

So you always need to use itex from now on? Before, just using tex didn't give you a new line...

hmmm then what was the function of itex when using images?

 

[jhae2.718]

So you always need to use itex from now on? Before, just using tex didn't give you a new line...

I think in MathJax behaves more closely like $...$ and like \begin{equation}...\end{equation} than they did in imgtex.

 

[cepheid]

hmmm then what was the function of itex when using images?

Well itex created images with a symbol size that was closer to the plain text characters (for the default font size). It also didn't mess up the line spacing nearly as much as inline images generated using tex tags did. On the downside, I always found itex equations kind of small to read.

Edit: also, the inline tex images were never in the right vertical position wrt the rest of the line. They were too high. The itex ones were aligned properly.

 

[Fredrik]

Sometimes it was necessary to use tex instead of itex even for inline text, because itex cut off the top of the taller symbols, like \vec A. So I suspect that a lot of posts will look weird if tex tags start new lines now. I'm not sure how much effort I'd put into solving that problem though. Maybe we will just have to accept that old posts will look ugly.

 

[mishrashubham]

because the user didn't use itex

I wish I had posted only a day later.

BTW, how old do posts have to be in order to become un-editable by the poster?

 

[FtlIsAwesome]

We currently host 1,114,554 latex graphics.

I am having no difficulties seeing the equations, other than a brief loading time. I'm using Chrome on Windows 7.

What is the difference between tex and itex tags?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

i'm going to keep it up all night because the devs haven't gotten back to me yet

 

[Lacy33]

Let me know when you get this fixed because I still can't do math.

 

[coelho]

For me the greatest problem with this new implementation of latex is it only works when the javascript is enabled.
I usually let it disabled as it makes the pages load way faster (or rather less slowly... dial-up speed here ), and i would prefer keep this way.

 

[Redbelly98]

I just printed the thread

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=491078&highlight=speed,

and every "+", "-", "=", and integral sign (and possible other stuff) is missing

printed to a physical piece of paper? do they display fine in the thread?

I notice that if you select equations in the post George linked to, the "+", "-", "=", and "/" symbols are not highlighted like the others. This would be a faster way to see the problem than printing out hardcopies, if you are trying to debug this issue.

 

[jhae2.718]

It looks like operators don't highlight in any post. It seems to work fine on the MathJax demo page, but not on PF.

Edit: it works in FF4 if you switch the renderer to HTML-CSS. (Right click on an equation, go to Settings > Math Renderer > HTML-CSS).

Math also looks better IMO.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

It looks like operators don't highlight in any post. It seems to work fine on the MathJax demo page, but not on PF.

Edit: it works in FF4 if you switch the renderer to HTML-CSS. (Right click on an equation, go to Settings > Math Renderer > HTML-CSS).

Math also looks better IMO.

hmm it should have always been HTML-CSS. Was your default set to MathML? FF has known MathML problems still.

On second thought it does appear at least FF is defaulting to NativeMML. I manually changed FF to use HTML-CSS and the equations look greatly improved.

 

[jhae2.718]

On PF at least Firefox defaulted to MathML rendering. Not sure if you can force HTML-CSS rendering from the server side.

Also, when using HTML rendering it seems to me that the 120% scaling is overkill. (FF seemed to render MathML unusually small, but for me at least HTML/CSS rendering is fine at 100%.)

 

[Fredrik]

BTW, how old do posts have to be in order to become un-editable by the poster?

I think the current limit is 11 hours and 40 minutes (700 minutes).