4 ms·

I cannot upvote this enough. It is a hugely crucial project to get MathML on Chrome. I don’t think W3C gets enough love, the standards for CSS and HTML have pr

I cannot upvote this enough. It is a hugely crucial project to get MathML on Chrome. I don’t think W3C gets enough love, the standards for CSS and HTML have provided one of the most awesome foundations for information delivery. Corporations are trying to take away open web from us, but like the FOSS movement, I’m super proud that humanity has at least until now had an open web, and that partly is due to the great work of W3C standardizing web languages. Chrome really dropped the ball on MathML - yes MathJax is amazing (side note: I just released my own rich text web editor that is powered by MathJax - https://writer.math.dev https://writer.math.dev), but we all know that MathML is a key chance to have a standardized form of recording digital math. I am very specific in saying recording and not inputting as MathML is not suitable for human input in most cases, but as a XML like markup, it is great for recording digitally. AsciiMath to me is the best way to input math. I would love to support this project, but I wasn’t able to find a smaller donation amount section (let me know). I really hope the team are able to get Chrome to adopt MathML.

jfim 6y ago
MathML support was removed eight years ago from Chrome, actually. See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=152430#c32 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=152430...
- abhinav22 6y ago
  Thanks - yes, I know; but good to see the original source of the discussion vs reading from blogs etc. Math is used so widely in the sciences, I’m very disappointed that Google didn’t put some resources to get MathML working in Chrome. It has really hampered online math publishing :( MathJax is great, but it’s slow and not a native to the browser.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
Jyaif 6y ago
I don't believe that MathML should be integrated in a browser: MathML does not requires a lot of CPU, so you can get away with JS+canvas that implements the MathML spec. By having it in the browser you are making the browser more bloated (more disk space, more memory, more cache misses) and possibly less stable/secure, even-though less than 1% of the people are going to use this feature. Other issues include increasing the barrier of entry for new browsers, having to deal with differences in implementation of MathML when using it, and making the spec harder to improve.
- abhinav22 6y ago
  There’s so much bloat in Browsers already though. And millions of school children study math, so there’s a big market for online mathematics. I agree with you that the solution needs to be a good one, you don’t want a standard that is difficult to implement across browsers or is inefficient / bad. I’m no expert so I can’t comment on MathML, but I am just hopeful that some standardized math format can be agreed on; and web standards have the best chance for this —- hence its important for Chrome to implement what is a W3C standard. My opinion anyway.
- jacques_chester 6y ago
  This is an argument against any and all changes.
  - Jyaif 6y ago
    No. I'm in favor of features that enable new uses cases, either by providing a new API (e.g. WebBluetooth) or by massively increasing performance (e.g. WebGL, WebAssembly). Features that can be built on top of those foundations should not be shipped in browsers for the reasons that I mentioned before.
- malthejorgensen 6y ago
  Totally agree – KaTeX is good enough. Browser implementors should spend their time on other things.
  - 6y ago
bawolff 6y ago
> I’m super proud that humanity has at least until now had an open web, and that partly is due to the great work of W3C standardizing web languages. W3C undoubtedly had a role, but i think this is a bit of a revionist history to say that w3c is what got us the open web.

jfim 6y ago

MathML support was removed eight years ago from Chrome, actually. See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=152430#c32 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=152430...

abhinav22 6y ago
Thanks - yes, I know; but good to see the original source of the discussion vs reading from blogs etc. Math is used so widely in the sciences, I’m very disappointed that Google didn’t put some resources to get MathML working in Chrome. It has really hampered online math publishing :( MathJax is great, but it’s slow and not a native to the browser.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

Jyaif 6y ago

I don't believe that MathML should be integrated in a browser: MathML does not requires a lot of CPU, so you can get away with JS+canvas that implements the MathML spec. By having it in the browser you are making the browser more bloated (more disk space, more memory, more cache misses) and possibly less stable/secure, even-though less than 1% of the people are going to use this feature. Other issues include increasing the barrier of entry for new browsers, having to deal with differences in implementation of MathML when using it, and making the spec harder to improve.

abhinav22 6y ago
There’s so much bloat in Browsers already though. And millions of school children study math, so there’s a big market for online mathematics. I agree with you that the solution needs to be a good one, you don’t want a standard that is difficult to implement across browsers or is inefficient / bad. I’m no expert so I can’t comment on MathML, but I am just hopeful that some standardized math format can be agreed on; and web standards have the best chance for this —- hence its important for Chrome to implement what is a W3C standard. My opinion anyway.
jacques_chester 6y ago
This is an argument against any and all changes.
- Jyaif 6y ago
  No. I'm in favor of features that enable new uses cases, either by providing a new API (e.g. WebBluetooth) or by massively increasing performance (e.g. WebGL, WebAssembly). Features that can be built on top of those foundations should not be shipped in browsers for the reasons that I mentioned before.
malthejorgensen 6y ago
Totally agree – KaTeX is good enough. Browser implementors should spend their time on other things.
- 6y ago

bawolff 6y ago

> I’m super proud that humanity has at least until now had an open web, and that partly is due to the great work of W3C standardizing web languages. W3C undoubtedly had a role, but i think this is a bit of a revionist history to say that w3c is what got us the open web.