If I were just writing my own Docbook source I do indeed know how to get the result I want, but I'm not; I'm subject to the constraints of what asciibook outputs as XML in the first step of the a2x chain - which is entirely unlike the way I'd write Docbook+math by hand.
It appears that David Miller previously in this thread may have had a solution, and I am hoping that someone still has a copy of that, or of a similar solution, so I don't personally have to delve into a morass of XSL and Docbook customization layers again. I know from painful experience that is time-consuming and highly non-fun. I think that having such a solution out of the box, or at least well documented would be a good thing for asciidoc, since I doubt I'm the only person who ever has or will want to include math in their documents without having to jump through conditional hoops and customization layers and multiple input representations of equations simply to get them to appear in multiple forms of output. Jon On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 11:56:35 PM UTC-7, Lex Trotman wrote: > > On 11 September 2015 at 12:38, Jon Leech <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 7:05:47 PM UTC-7, Lex Trotman wrote: > >> > >> mathjax is a javascript in-browser math renderer, so it won't do > >> anything for PDF. That will still need to use a toolchain that > >> supports latexmath, eg dblatex IIUC. > > > > > > Understood. My goal is to put latexmath: in my input, and have the LaTeX > > passed through *unchanged* both to the output HTML from the Docbook > > toolchain, and to the input LaTeX the toolchain hands off for PDF > > generation. > > a2x doesn't see any latex created for PDF generation, thats entirely > inside dblatex. When generating PDF a2x just runs asciidoc to > generate docbook and runs dblatex with that as input. Note xsltproc > is not used. > > > All the pain of transforming LaTeX into images or MathML or any > > other representation is completely unnecessary in a MathJax-enabled > world, > > because it just *works* in the browser. I am just looking for some help > on > > getting LaTeX passed through the a2x toolchain untouched. At the moment > the > > output XML from asciibook ends up with the LaTeX imbedded in an alt tag > > inside the (otherwise empty) <inlineequation> etc. blocks > > So its in the docbook! > > > , and disappears > > after xsltproc applies the Docbook stylesheets. > > And thats what I meant by the line below about needing to configure > the toolchains to pass the latex through. > > > > >> You would need to look at how they configure to include javascript like > >> mathjax. > > > > > > That much I know how to do with modified XSLT for Docbook source > already. > > It's getting the LaTeX into the Docbook source unmodified that I need > help > > with, and was hoping the up-thread example might do for me. > > Ummm, I'm a bit confused here, you said above that you were getting > the latex in the alt tag of the docbook? And you say you have > modified XSLT so I am not sure where the problem is, unless the > modifications are not right :) > > Cheers > Lex > > > > > Jon > > > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > > "asciidoc" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an > > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "asciidoc" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
