Some pages show raw math syntax (LaTeX?)

MDN URL: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PeriodicWave

What information was incorrect, unhelpful, or incomplete?

“\left(a+bi\right)e^{i} , \left(c+di\right)e^{2i} , \left(f+gi\right)e^{3i}” appears on this page, which is unreadable. It looks a bit like LaTeX, presumably this was once turned into a math image?

Specific section or headline?

• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PeriodicWave#example
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/hypot
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/sqrt
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Math/PI
• https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Attribute/transform

What did you expect to see?

No expectations, just not this 😃

MDN Content page report details

• Folder: en-us/web/api/periodicwave
• MDN URL: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/PeriodicWave
• GitHub URL: https://github.com/mdn/content/blob/main/files/en-us/web/api/periodicwave/index.html
• Last commit: https://github.com/mdn/content/commit/babc0473793bbe3cfa66cd96fae7f84348be373b
• Document last modified: 2021-02-08T10:05:46.000Z

[wbamberg]

I just did a quick search just in the web directory and it came back with 253 <math matches in 86 files. Enough to be noticeable, but also not a huge percentage.

I also wonder what the strategy is for MathML with the move to markdown - does that influence how this is tackled?

The plan is to keep it, so anything inside <math> tags stays unconverted. It’s not very common, its use tends to be clustered in niche areas, and there isn’t really a Markdown equivalent in many cases.

[schalkneethling]

MathJax is gone for good.

Sorry for reusing this issue. The only one returned when searching for MathJax. Just for my own understanding for similar situations in future - we don’t use MathJax because that would add a potentially heavy dependency on every page on MDN, right? Or is there more to it?

From what I understand the examples on MDN does not warrant something like MathJax and the CSS solution we added is good enough? It might be worth considering MathJax as I note their statement regarding accessibility https://www.mathjax.org/#a11y

The way we currently do it does no add the CSS to every page but, only to pages that has math element and then only if viewed in a browser that does not support MathML. We could probably do the exact same thing with MathJax.

Thoughts @ddbeck and @Rumyra? Is the current solution good enough and accessible? Should we consider MathJax? Thanks!