Template talk:Math

Broken templates with MediaWiki 1.30.0

The {{math}} template was working with an older version of MediaWiki. Now, with this version of MediaWiki, it does not work anymore. Also, the {{edit}} and {{purge}} templates are not working anymore. I suspect that many other templates might not work anymore, either due to a different behavior of MediaWiki or due to different limits (e.g. maximum number of template calls, maximum number of nested templates, ...). — Daniel Forgues 21:38, 9 February 2018 (EST)

There are many broken templates with MediaWiki 1.30.0, not just the {{math}} template! — Daniel Forgues 22:40, 9 February 2018 (EST)

Up to just a few days ago, under the previous MediaWiki version (which version was it?), I did not see so many broken templates. There are lots of broken templates, either due to a change of behavior of the new version of MediaWiki, or due to different configuration settings of MediaWiki. — Daniel Forgues 22:40, 9 February 2018 (EST)

See also: User talk:Daniel Forgues#Broken templates with MediaWiki 1.30.0.

MediaWiki extension StringFunctions is now missing!

The MediaWiki extension StringFunctions is not shown anymore in Special:Version#Installed extensions

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:StringFunctions

whereas it was previously, and lots of templates use that extension, which is one reason why so many templates don't work anymore! — Daniel Forgues 23:01, 9 February 2018 (EST)

The {{math}} template was using the MediaWiki extension StringFunctions. — Daniel Forgues 23:20, 9 February 2018 (EST)

On https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:StringFunctions

This extension is obsolete. All of these functions are now integrated into the ParserFunctions extension, but are only available if an administrator sets $wgPFEnableStringFunctions = true; in LocalSettings.php.

— Daniel Forgues 23:27, 9 February 2018 (EST)

More than a hundred templates, including Template:Math, require Extension:StringFunctions. — Daniel Forgues 22:45, 13 February 2018 (EST)

Please continue this discussion on

User talk:Russ Cox#MediaWiki extension StringFunctions is now missing! — Daniel Forgues 23:53, 13 February 2018 (EST)

LaTeX vs HTML+CSS math

Inline style:

• LaTeX: \scriptstyle font renders too small compared with HTML (with no spaces around operators), \textstyle font renders too big compared with HTML; font is blurry compared with HTML; baseline alignment often not right;
• HTML+CSS: we can get the right font size; font is not blurry; baseline alignment not yet always right, I admit (this is a work in progress... I hope I can get this right); we need to use many templates, unfortunately.

Display style:

• LaTeX: font renders too big compared with HTML and font is blurry compared with HTML, though not as much an inconvenience for display style (standalone) math;
• HTML+CSS: font is not blurry; vertical alignment issues, I admit (this is a work in progress... I hope I can get this right); we need to use many templates, unfortunately.

I have written the math on Euclidean algorithm so we can display the math either in HTML+CSS or LaTeX:

• text style (inline) math: LaTeX or HTML+CSS: $ or &, respectively, as last argument of {{math}};
• display style (standalone) math: LaTeX or HTML+CSS: $$ or &&, respectively, as last argument of {{math}}.

— Daniel Forgues 01:55, 17 March 2018 (EDT)