4 ms·

His first example is eiπ = −1. Note how that was displayed fine inline, just by using , which has been in HTML for years, along with which I

His first example is eiπ = −1. Note how that was displayed fine inline, just by using , which has been in HTML for years, along with which I used to show the TEΧ e. Writing in utf8 means I don’t need a special sequence like \pi for π. ... So all that tells me that instead of doing `^{content}` for superscripts I have to use the longer and more painful `content`, and that I should always have a Unicode table on hand to copy/paste from for special characters that I can't write using my EN_US keyboard. There's currently no strong case to use HTML (even with full CSS3 and SVG support) as a replacement for LaTeX, mainly because HTML was made for web typesetting - which is normally focused around shorter blocks of text - while LaTeX was made for people who want to be able to typeset and read documents which are tens and sometimes hundreds of pages long. The two domains just have different requirements.

javajosh 11y ago
>`^{content}` for superscripts I have to use the longer and more painful `content` This is superficial, and one could trivially write a markdown style pre-processor if you wanted the former syntax (and I would be highly surprised if someone hasn't already done that). >I should always have a Unicode table on hand to copy/paste from for special characters that I can't write using my EN_US keyboard One way or another, you need such a table. For TeX the table consists of ASCII symbol names. (Note also that unicode characters do indeed have an ASCII representation using character entity syntax, although it's ugly.)[0] >HTML short...TeX long...The two domains just have different requirements. What justification do you have for this claim? HTML was designed by TBL for researchers to share papers, and there is plenty of long-form content written in HTML. TeX is great. HTML is great. They'll probably both be around for a long time. There are trade-offs between them, but not the ones you've identified. (In particular, TeX's great strength is similar to PDF in that it's output is totally stable. Browsers by contrast are notoriously dynamic and won't, in general, produce the same output.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_and_HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_and_HTML
- verandaguy 11y ago
 This is superficial, and one could trivially write a markdown style pre- processor if you wanted the former syntax That feels just a tiny bit circular. It's like if I wrote a huge set of C++ preprocessor macros so that I can write my code in JavaScript, have the preprocessor do its magic and transpile it down to plain C++, and then have it compiled down to machine code. One way or another, you need such a table. For TeX the table consists of ASCII symbol names. Not necessarily. It's not difficult to memorize the commands that produce commonly used symbols; `\pi`, `\sum_{}^{}`, `\int`, `\frac{}{}`, `\times`, etc. They're all really, really mnemonic with a consistent naming scheme, and if you don't like a symbol's command, you can always alias it to a new command in the preamble. I'll give you the last part though, that was my mistake - but I did meant that the environments used to render HTML as well as certain associated standards are shifting towards their more common uses, which are along the lines of websites and blogs rather than research papers.
JadeNB 11y ago
I also think that one should be ashamed of a typesetting solution that requires so blatantly lying about the semantic meaning as to pretend that the base of an exponential is a subscript.
Symbiote 11y ago
> special characters that I can't write using my EN_US keyboard I set the "menu" key on my en_gb_dvorak keyboard to be compose. I use it most days, whether to type the Ö in a colleague's name, € on a budget, ² in m², → anywhere, or • (or even ①) in a plain text document. The file /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/Compose contains many definitions, but they don't all work, and it lacks π. I'm not sure where mine are read from. Whoever wrote it had a sense of humour. <Multi_key> <L> <L> <A> : "" U1F596 # RAISED HAND WITH PART BETWEEN MIDDLE AND RING FINGERS Edit: It seems HN won't display the character: http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f596/index.htm http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f596/index.htm
leephillips 11y ago
The OA is a reply to my article in LWN which was discussed in HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10468755 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10468755 . I'll write a detailed reply to this reply when I get time; for now, note that Marks' attempt to render Euler's equation in HTML is incorrect: his result has Roman (upright) characters where math italics should be.
- leephillips 11y ago
  My reply is at http://lee-phillips.org/replyToMarks/ http://lee-phillips.org/replyToMarks/ After it appeared he began to scramble to fix the errors in his markup that I found, silently. He's having some difficulty understanding the spec, however.

javajosh 11y ago

>`^{content}` for superscripts I have to use the longer and more painful `content` This is superficial, and one could trivially write a markdown style pre-processor if you wanted the former syntax (and I would be highly surprised if someone hasn't already done that). >I should always have a Unicode table on hand to copy/paste from for special characters that I can't write using my EN_US keyboard One way or another, you need such a table. For TeX the table consists of ASCII symbol names. (Note also that unicode characters do indeed have an ASCII representation using character entity syntax, although it's ugly.)[0] >HTML short...TeX long...The two domains just have different requirements. What justification do you have for this claim? HTML was designed by TBL for researchers to share papers, and there is plenty of long-form content written in HTML. TeX is great. HTML is great. They'll probably both be around for a long time. There are trade-offs between them, but not the ones you've identified. (In particular, TeX's great strength is similar to PDF in that it's output is totally stable. Browsers by contrast are notoriously dynamic and won't, in general, produce the same output.) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_and_HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_and_HTML

verandaguy 11y ago
This is superficial, and one could trivially write a markdown style pre- processor if you wanted the former syntax That feels just a tiny bit circular. It's like if I wrote a huge set of C++ preprocessor macros so that I can write my code in JavaScript, have the preprocessor do its magic and transpile it down to plain C++, and then have it compiled down to machine code. One way or another, you need such a table. For TeX the table consists of ASCII symbol names. Not necessarily. It's not difficult to memorize the commands that produce commonly used symbols; `\pi`, `\sum_{}^{}`, `\int`, `\frac{}{}`, `\times`, etc. They're all really, really mnemonic with a consistent naming scheme, and if you don't like a symbol's command, you can always alias it to a new command in the preamble. I'll give you the last part though, that was my mistake - but I did meant that the environments used to render HTML as well as certain associated standards are shifting towards their more common uses, which are along the lines of websites and blogs rather than research papers.

JadeNB 11y ago

I also think that one should be ashamed of a typesetting solution that requires so blatantly lying about the semantic meaning as to pretend that the base of an exponential is a subscript.

Symbiote 11y ago

> special characters that I can't write using my EN_US keyboard I set the "menu" key on my en_gb_dvorak keyboard to be compose. I use it most days, whether to type the Ö in a colleague's name, € on a budget, ² in m², → anywhere, or • (or even ①) in a plain text document. The file /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/Compose contains many definitions, but they don't all work, and it lacks π. I'm not sure where mine are read from. Whoever wrote it had a sense of humour. <Multi_key> <L> <L> <A> : "" U1F596 # RAISED HAND WITH PART BETWEEN MIDDLE AND RING FINGERS Edit: It seems HN won't display the character: http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f596/index.htm http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/char/1f596/index.htm

leephillips 11y ago

The OA is a reply to my article in LWN which was discussed in HN at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10468755 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10468755 . I'll write a detailed reply to this reply when I get time; for now, note that Marks' attempt to render Euler's equation in HTML is incorrect: his result has Roman (upright) characters where math italics should be.

leephillips 11y ago
My reply is at http://lee-phillips.org/replyToMarks/ http://lee-phillips.org/replyToMarks/ After it appeared he began to scramble to fix the errors in his markup that I found, silently. He's having some difficulty understanding the spec, however.

His first example is eiπ = −1. Note how that was displayed fine inline, just by using <sup>, which has been in HTML for years, along with <sub> which I

His first example is eiπ = −1. Note how that was displayed fine inline, just by using <sup>, which has been in HTML for years, along with <sub> which I