Talk:Check Machin-like formulas: Difference between revisions
→Formulae hidden to most browsers by under-tested cosmetic edits on 24 July 2016
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 65:
: (A couple of formulae remain coincidentally invisible in the preamble to the GAP contribution) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 15:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::There is no space around the invisible formula in the GAP section. Also, it prints correctly on Wikipedia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kiwipidae/Test test]. I don't intend to circumvent a botched LaTeX implementation. [[User:Arbautjc|Arbautjc]] ([[User talk:Arbautjc|talk]]) 16:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::: Helpful to readers, perhaps, to add a note that you have only managed to make those two formulae '''(k \mathrm{atan}(x)''' and '''\frac{5\pi}4)''' visible in Firefox ? (And perhaps give plain text equivalents ? Very understandable that you don't want to pay the price of someone else's Latex limitations, so I'm sure you won't want your readers to pay it either :-) [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 17:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
::::Actually, I'm already paying it, since I am using Opera now. You are right, I can change the formula to text. [[User:Arbautjc|Arbautjc]] ([[User talk:Arbautjc|talk]]) 19:11, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
:::::: PS I don't know what your view is of the parallel issue in the Python contribution to https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Faulhaber%27s_formula [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 15:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
::::: :-) Many thanks – one more page completely clear of that 'exheight' glitch now [[User:Hout|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout|talk]]) 19:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
| |||