On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 10:18:54AM -0800, Axel Boldt wrote:
--- Tomasz Wegrzanowski taw@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
But you can see a diference between "possible to do in HTML" and "sane to do in HTML" now.
Yes. But do we agree that formulas that are "sane to do in HTML", like x<sup>2</sup> + y<sup>2</sup> ≥ 0 for instance, should be written in HTML even when the TeX system is in place?
No. It sould be in pseudo-TeX.
Part of my plan is to make Wikipedias available on dict format and put it them into Debian packages. The less HTML it will use, the more useful these dicts will be.
I'm not completely sure about safety. Probably we should both validate and run TeX in safe mode.
For safety concerns, preparsing of TeX is not necessary: the safety issues of running PHP and calling an external parser are much larger.
Right. How to put TeX into safe mode ?
texvc is extremely easy to extend. It shouldn't take too much time just to add a few dozens of new tags, and a night or two should be enough for completely new kind of markup, be it chemistry (which certainly should be added), chess, music or whatever.
Unfortunately, the xypic package (which I consider the one feature that is really needed in the math area right now) as well as the other packages I listed all use their own idiosyncratic syntax quite unlike ordinary TeX. So extending texvc may not be quite as simple, and I'm afraid we are creating a development bottleneck by requiring the external parsing stage.
If the only thing that can be done with them is generating PNGs, then PNGs should be generated and uploaded. Syntax of xypic is neither widely-known nor (as far as I can see) very readable, so I don't see much benefit with it being generated on server.