Ben Foppa benjamin.foppa at gmail.com
Wed Jan 8 17:23:05 UTC 2014

I tend to opt for writing plaintext LaTeX, and if the reader wants it to be
pretty, they can use TeX the World (although it looks like this is now
unmaintained and only viable in chrome).
On Jan 7, 2014 2:08 PM, "Carter Schonwald" <carter.schonwald at gmail.com>
wrote:

> In the case of MathJax, the fall back is you just get some inline latex.
>
> On Tuesday, January 7, 2014, Mateusz Kowalczyk wrote:
>
>> On 07/01/14 12:18, Antonio Nikishaev wrote:
>> > Mateusz Kowalczyk <fuuzetsu at fuuzetsu.co.uk> writes:
>> >
>> >> On 07/01/14 01:42, Carter Schonwald wrote:
>> >>> I would really love to use MathJax in the haddock HTML backend. Is
>> there
>> >>> any way (however hacky) that I could do that?
>> >>
>> >> I looked up how MathJax is used and as far as I can tell, it's just
>> >> the case of putting the MathJax JavaScript header into the file,
>> >> right? We already use JavaScript on the Haddock-generated HTML pages,
>> >> for example the synopsis box.
>> >>
>> >> While I prefer JavaScript-free web I think that for viewing on
>> >> Hackage, it'd be possible to just stick the header into the generated
>> >> files and be done with it. Here are some caveats:
>> >>
>> >> * You suddenly allow for part of documentation to be rendered by
>> >>   someone else, over the Internet. The problem is that documentation
>> >>   suddenly becomes worse for everyone browsing without JavaScript or
>> >>   browsing locally, without an Internet connection. Embedding images
>> >>   avoids both of these problems.
>> >
>> > No. It's rendered in the browser.
>> >
>>
>> It still requires an Internet connection, does it not? Many people
>> prefer to browse without JavaScript anyway (myself included) and if the
>> documentation suddenly requires JavaScript to view properly, this is a
>> problem.
>>
>> --
>> Mateusz K.
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>
> _______________________________________________