[Haskell-cafe] Haddock Markup
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  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 .
>  http://www1.chapman.edu/~jipsen/asciimath.html
>  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.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe