On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 01:40:44AM +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > @display already means something unrelated to math, I would suggest not > using it especially. > > > In fact, an alternative is to detect when there is input like > > > > @tex > > $$a+b$$ > > @end tex > > > > and process this as display math. > > That's exactly what I proposed to avoid...
It would also be incompatible with documents that already used this syntax and provided other options for other output formats - the block would be output twice. > Indeed, instead of using a > format specifc command, specific environements like > > @displaymath > a+b > @end displaymath > > @equation > a+b > @end equation > > could be used. I like @displaymath better, as an equation would have to have an equals sign. > Actually, it is not perfect, as the language used for > the math in those @-command could be LaTeX or TeX, or something else, > for example MathML, as there is nothing like a Texinfo math language. There is the same issue with the existing command @math. I say just leave it as plain TeX and worry about AMS-LaTex another time. > > DocBook has the <equation> element which could be used for DocBook > > output (https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/4.5/equation.html). > > Indeed, but only if there is something similar in Texinfo, and also > what is inside should be expanded to a format thta can be nested in > <equation>. Looks like using an image would probably be the best in > that case. I see, so you wouldn't want TeX syntax in the DocBook output. > > > Another remark, I think that the class that enables mathjax should be > > > specific and not 'math', as we may want, for example to have the math > > > class be added to @math element irrespective of mathjax being handled > > > or not. For example, tex2jax_process could be used to be similar with > > > tex2jax_ignore. > > > > So <em class='math'> by default, and > > <em class='math' class='tex2jax_process'> for MathJax? > > I would favor no class by default and class='tex2jax_process' for MathJax. > I think that we should avoid using class='math' unless there is a need, > such as a specific css style. Or we shold start doing that for all the > @-commmands consistently. I think <em class='math'> marks it as math and this would allow it to be processed by some other tool. Just using <em> would give no way to find the unprocessed TeX code in the file. > Also I may be wrong, but it seems that <em class='math' > class='tex2jax_process'> > would not be correct, it should be > <em class='math tex2jax_process'> > Which means that it would probably be better to call _attribute_class > if both a class for css that can be inlined and another class, such as > tex2jax_process is needed, by adding, for example an array argument to > _attribute_class to pass additional classes not corresponding to css > style, and also maybe handling the case of the $class argument set to > undef. No need to do anything until there is a concrete case, though. I see. I only used <em class='tex2jax_process'> for HTML_MATH=mathjax so that should be OK.
