inline markup for mathjax equations not working in v2.1.3

[Frédéric De Groef]

In version 2.1.2 and earlier, it was possible to write latex contents inline without creating a macro block (with the syntax \[ \]).

Since commit #ad239b8db9592b25f841b15792a311c8e80fd5d0, this syntax does not seem supported anymore.

The reason is that for people familiar with latex, it's more convenient to see the math contents inside the text instead of having to go through the macro popup (although I understand that such inline decoration may not play well with other extensions).

Is removing inline markup by design? Was it/will it be replaced by some other markup?

[Scott Selberg]

Duplicate of #30.

[Scott Selberg]

Hi, I'm not sure if you created issue #30 or not. That user didn't leave their name. I changed the bounding text because I was assuming that people were using the mathjax macros to insert mathjax - and that macro places the start and end tags. So I'm curious to know how you are entering the mathjax text.

Also, I created a draft of a version that allows you to specify which bounding tags you would like. I had a user who had some database query syntax that was matching and so the mathjax formatting was incorrectly being applied. You can grab the jar file from issue #30. On the ticket, it looks like anonymous attached the jar file - but I'm the author. I'm looking for some feedback to see if it meets the needs. If it does, I'll release it to the marketplace.

[Frédéric De Groef]

Hello Scott,

No, I did not create issue #30. I searched for a similar issue before submitting mine but it did not come up.

Most of our pages with latex contents use the inline markup, because users are familiar with the latex syntax, and it leaves the equation contents in the text itself. This is a faster workflow than having to click around in the UI. This is really a usability aspect: some users are okay with plaintext editing, some will always use the macro and the editor with preview. Unless there is a very good reason not to, I think it makes sense to still support both workflows.

You solution seems like it would solve the issue. Although I would like to know more about the conflict that motivated the change, to make sure we don't end up with the same problem (at worst case, then we can plan a transition period for page authors to migrate their pages to the macro-only syntax).

[Scott Selberg]

It was issue #24 that started this.

[Frédéric De Groef]

I see. While I still think it's a good addition to be able to toggle on or off the inline markup and choose which characters to use (even though the parens and square brackets are good defaults I would prefer to keep, because these are actually mathjax defaults), in this case I wonder if the user in issue #24 should not simply put their contents in a code block or 'no format' macro.

Does the mathjax plugin parses and interprets the contents of other macros?