Why are MathJax images not displaying on my webpage?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around issues related to the implementation and functionality of MathJax for rendering LaTeX on a webpage. Participants explore the display of mathematical expressions, the transition from image-based rendering to MathJax, and the implications for users and server load. The scope includes technical troubleshooting, user experience, and the rendering of various LaTeX environments.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants report that MathJax is enabled but LaTeX images are not displaying correctly.
  • There is confusion over whether MathJax replaces nicely formatted LaTeX images and whether users must continue typing LaTeX code.
  • Some participants mention issues with specific LaTeX environments, such as align and tabular, not rendering as expected.
  • Concerns are raised about the visual quality of rendered equations compared to previous image-based rendering.
  • Participants discuss the potential benefits of MathJax in reducing server load due to lower bandwidth requirements for text compared to images.
  • There are mixed feelings about the new appearance of equations, with some expressing dissatisfaction and others suggesting that the appearance can be configured.
  • Some participants inquire about the availability of all math symbols and the ability to view LaTeX code directly.
  • One participant mentions that MathJax allows for an unlimited number of LaTeX equations, contrasting with previous limitations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a variety of opinions regarding the functionality and appearance of MathJax. There is no consensus on whether the changes are beneficial or detrimental, and multiple competing views remain regarding the effectiveness of MathJax compared to previous methods.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that certain LaTeX environments and features may not be supported, and there are unresolved issues regarding the rendering of specific mathematical expressions. The discussion reflects a range of user experiences and expectations regarding the transition to MathJax.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for web developers, educators, and users who rely on LaTeX for mathematical expressions in online platforms, particularly those interested in the technical aspects of rendering and user experience with MathJax.

  • #211
Borek said:
LOL, that would mean old problems with preview are still here :wink:

hmmm I can't reproduce this problem on FF 4.0.1
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #212
Greg Bernhardt said:
hmmm I can't reproduce this problem on FF 4.0.1

If you want, I can make a video about what I do exactly. But I don't know the software for filming the desktop though...
 
  • #213
Do you have an add-on installed that might be causing the problem?
 
  • #214
vela said:
Do you have an add-on installed that might be causing the problem?

The weird thing is that the same problem also occurs on IE. So I don't think add-ons will be the problem.
Also, if I edit the post, then only the LaTeX of the edited post doesn't work. All other LaTeX formulas work fine...
 
  • #215
micromass said:
The weird thing is that the same problem also occurs on IE. So I don't think add-ons will be the problem.
Also, if I edit the post, then only the LaTeX of the edited post doesn't work. All other LaTeX formulas work fine...
I see the same behavior with Safari. MathJax runs when the browser says it's done processing the page. Apparently, saving the edited post doesn't cause the browser to send this signal, which makes sense since if you have a script that runs when the page finishes loading, you probably don't want it to run again if you modify just a small piece of the page. So the text of the edited post doesn't get processed.

EDIT: Firefox on the Mac acts the same way as well.
 
  • #216
vela said:
I see the same behavior with Safari. MathJax runs when the browser says it's done processing the page. Apparently, saving the edited post doesn't cause the browser to send this signal, which makes sense since if you have a script that runs when the page finishes loading, you probably don't want it to run again if you modify just a small piece of the page. So the text of the edited post doesn't get processed.

EDIT: Firefox on the Mac acts the same way as well.

Are we talking about quick editing?
 
  • #217
Just testing...

ax^2 + bx + c = 0

Strange - quick edit under Opera, once worked, thrice didn't (OK, I am not going to edit it once again, when it worked it must have been some other problem, as the page reloaded, which usually doesn't happen).

I guess when the page code is changed after quick edit MathJax script is not called.
 
  • #218
Yes, that's the thing - refreshing works, quick edit doesn't.

So when it comes to preview we are back at square one.
 
  • #219
Borek said:
Yes, that's the thing - refreshing works, quick edit doesn't.

So when it comes to preview we are back at square one.

There has never been preview for quick edit. Quick edit save would require a refresh because quick edit is an AJAX function that does not call MathJax.
 
  • #220
Borek said:
LOL, that would mean old problems with preview are still here :wink:
I don't follow your logic. In fact, testing preview directly contradicts your conclusion.
 
  • #221
Greg Bernhardt said:
There has never been preview for quick edit.

Yep, obvious, I got things mixed up
 
  • #222
I've had the same problem as Micromass since we made the move to MathJax. Every time I save an edit, I only see the source code. (Previews work fine. The problem is that when I view the post after saving the changes, I only see source code). A refresh solves the problem.

This isn't nearly as annoying or confusing as the old preview problem, which required a refresh after each preview. It also required me to explain it to someone else once a week.
 
  • #223
Fredrik said:
I've had the same problem as Micromass since we made the move to MathJax. Every time I save an edit, I only see the source code. (Previews work fine. The problem is that when I view the post after saving the changes, I only see source code). A refresh solves the problem.

This isn't nearly as annoying or confusing as the old preview problem, which required a refresh after each preview. It also required me to explain it to someone else once a week.

I've been having this problem too, in Safari.

Unrelated note: excited to see LaTeX working on mobile site!
 
  • #224
It's possible to manually invoke MathJax on a section of the page whose content has been changed - at least, I've seen it done on other sites. So that might be a feature to consider for the future.
 
  • #225
Fredrik said:
Every time I save an edit, I only see the source code. (Previews work fine. The problem is that when I view the post after saving the changes, I only see source code). A refresh solves the problem.
OK, I just did some testing, and I don't have this problem at all. I guess I just remembered it wrong when I wrote the above. There is no problem if I preview before I save the changes. The only time I see the source code instead of an image is when I just click edit, change something, and then click save. Both FF4 and IE9 behave the same way.
 
Last edited:
  • #226
There is a bug. Whatever is in noparse tags should be not parsed. That allows things like showing people how to embed youtube video: enter [noparse][/noparse] to get



But it is not working for tex nor itex tags, as - even if they are between noparse tags - they are parsed by MathJax. So

[nοparse][tеx]a=x^2[/tеx][/nοparse]

should yield

[tеx]a=x^2[/tеx]

but yields

[noparse]a=x^2[/noparse]

(and yes, I do tricks to display it properly :biggrin:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #228
I think I have seen the same problem about 10 hours ago, but to be honest I don't remember. You can be sure I will complain if it will repeat often enough :devil:
 
  • #229
Any thoughts on adding new delimiters for TeX code? MathJax supports multiple delimiters, so it won't break existing posts. Plus, it's faster typing something like $$ than the current tex and itex tags.
 
  • #230
vela said:
Any thoughts on adding new delimiters for TeX code? MathJax supports multiple delimiters, so it won't break existing posts. Plus, it's faster typing something like $$ than the current tex and itex tags.
I think it would be awesome if something like that could be implemented.

Btw, there's some discussion about that in this thread, starting at post #48.
 
  • #231
Hello, I have a problem...
I can't see the "Sigma" icon for creating LaTex code, even in advanced text mode...
I've tried both IE and Chrome, but still no icon there. What am I doing wrong?
 
  • #232
Daiquiri said:
I can't see the "Sigma" icon for creating LaTex code, even in advanced text mode...

It is not present in all subforums. Check general math or general physics - it is there, but not here.
 
  • #233
vela said:
Any thoughts on adding new delimiters for TeX code? MathJax supports multiple delimiters, so it won't break existing posts. Plus, it's faster typing something like $$ than the current tex and itex tags.

We probably don't want to go too far towards "posts in LaTex". There are some sub-forums here which have very little LaTeX use, and people there probably wouldn't appreciate having to type \$ to get a US Dollar sign.

The think that really bugs my typing is the foward slash in the closing tags and the backwards slash in LaTeX. [ \ tex ] (without the spaces!) as an alternative end tag would be nice.
 
  • #234
Hey, I'm glad to see that equations are automatically indented under the new implementation -- I'm pretty sure this was not the case before. I don't know if this is built into MathJax, or is a tweak by Greg, but I am happy to see it.

(At least this is true in FireFox 4)
 
  • #235
AlephZero said:
The think that really bugs my typing is the foward slash in the closing tags and the backwards slash in LaTeX. [ \ tex ] (without the spaces!) as an alternative end tag would be nice.
I am open to suggestions for additional delimiters.

Redbelly98 said:
Hey, I'm glad to see that equations are automatically indented under the new implementation -- I'm pretty sure this was not the case before.

It is a configuration setting in MathJax.
 
  • #236
I suggest

$f$ as an alternative to [itεx]f[/itεx]

$$f$$ as an alternative to [tεx]f[/tεx]

(I couldn't figure out how Borek did his magic so I just wrote ε instead of e to let you see what I wrote).

That first one might break a few old posts, but it still think it's the best option, since it's easy to type, and also what you actually type in a LaTeX document.
 
  • #237
Fredrik said:
I suggest

$f$ as an alternative to [itεx]f[/itεx]

$$f$$ as an alternative to [tεx]f[/tεx]

(I couldn't figure out how Borek did his magic so I just wrote ε instead of e to let you see what I wrote).

That first one might break a few old posts, but it still think it's the best option, since it's easy to type, and also what you actually type in a LaTeX document.

I second this idea. $'s instead of [ t e x ] would be a very welcome change!
 
  • #238
Fredrik said:
That first one might break a few old posts, but it still think it's the best option, since it's easy to type, and also what you actually type in a LaTeX document.
It not only breaks existing posts, but, as AlephZero noted, it makes it difficult to type a dollar sign when you want a dollar sign. Something like $$ and @@ would be better, or $$ and $$$.
 
  • #239
Yes, but this is a physics and math forum, not a forum for American accountants. :smile: I'm assuming that they can write something like \$3.50 instead of $3.50, and if that doesn't work, they can always write 3.50 USD.

(I'm not saying that I would find other options intolerable, only that I still like my suggestion best).
 
Last edited:
  • #240
Fredrik said:
Yes, but this is a physics and math forum, not a forum for American accountants. :smile: I'm assuming that they can write something like \$3.50 instead of $3.50, and if that doesn't work, they can always write 3.50 USD.

(I'm not saying that I would find other options intolerable, only that I still like my suggestion best).

I bet it would cause a lot of casual and new members a lot of grief at first. \$ is not intuitive :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
25K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
13K