Why are MathJax images not displaying on my webpage?

[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.