[Haskell-cafe] Haddock Markup

Khudyakov Alexey alexey.skladnoy at gmail.com
Sat Feb 7 07:46:25 EST 2009

On Friday 06 February 2009 21:24:35 Andy Smith wrote:
> 2009/2/6 Wolfgang Jeltsch <g9ks157k at acme.softbase.org>:
> > So using TeX as a general language for math is a very bad idea, in my
> > opinion. The problem is that there is no good language which provides
> > enough structural information for conversion into MathML and is at the
> > same time simple to write and read. Maybe, both requirements contradict.
> ASCIIMathML [1] is designed to do this. It doesn't cover everything in
> Presentation MathML, and makes no attempt to handle Content MathML,
> but you can do quite a lot with it. The notation has a formally
> defined grammar and rules for conversion to MathML [2].
> [1] http://www1.chapman.edu/~jipsen/asciimath.html
> [2] http://www1.chapman.edu/~jipsen/mathml/asciimathsyntax.html

TeX aim is presentation quality not structural information. And it's rather 
good at it. If one want really good looking formulae TeX is the answer. 

ASCIIMathML is nice but its produce not so good looking formulae. I've tried 
it some time ago and found it clearly inferior to TeX. It gives too little 
control over presentation. I wasn't able even to place integration indices 
exactly over and under integral sign.

P.S. Maybe I just to used to TeX. 

  Khudyakov Alexey

More information about the Haskell-Cafe mailing list