I want to know if I am allowed to use dollars, i.e. $, in title to render in there MathJax.
According to my research, I saw on other sites that askers already used MathJax in their title, but not in computer science stack exchange.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
-
2$\begingroup$ Rule of thumb: if your title doesn't make sense without (complex) mathematical formulae, it may not be good question at all. Try to come up with a natural language title that illustrates your question. Also, what Discrete Lizard wrote. $\endgroup$– Raphael ModJan 21, 2018 at 19:39
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
8
I don't think there's an official policy, but I agree with Raphael's answer that Mathjax should 'rather not' be used in titles, mostly for the reason that titles are (automatically) used in a lot of places that don't interpret Mathjax.
Specifically, my advice would be to:
If a title contains 'plaintext formulas', such as
Is O(n^2/2) <= O(n^2)?, do not edit it to replace it by Mathjax (which you should do if this occurs in the body of the question). You may replace it by 'unicode math':Is O(n²/2) ≤ O(n²)?, or remove the formulas completelyWhat is the effect of halving in big-O notation?.If a title already contains 'unicode math' (and is fine otherwise), don't touch it. I've seen people editing to replace unicode math with Mathjax in titles. Stop that.
If a title already contains Mathjax, you may wish to replace it by unicode math or remove the formula as in the first part. Just watch out for people willing to replace it by Mathjax again. Direct them to this answer, if you wish.
These points apply both when authoring a question and editing a question, the only difference is to err on the side of inaction when editing.
answered Jan 21, 2018 at 11:16
-
3
-
$\begingroup$ @Discretelizard In conclusion, you suggest to favor unicode math rather than or instead of MathJax. $\endgroup$– user82913Jan 28, 2018 at 9:18
-
2$\begingroup$ @user82913 In the title, yes. But it is even better if your can make a title that doesn't have formulas at all. So, basically what Raphael wrote. $\endgroup$– Discrete lizard ModJan 28, 2018 at 9:20
-
$\begingroup$ You're missing the middle ground here: MathJax will happily take unicode math and render it, so
Is $O(n²/2) ≤ O(n²)$?renders as "Is $O(n²/2) ≤ O(n²)$?". The clutter overhead of the dollar signs is minimal if the mathjax isn't rendered, and the improvement in readability where it does render is obvious. $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2018 at 13:37 -
1$\begingroup$ @EmilioPisanty "The clutter overhead of the dollar signs is minimal if the mathjax isn't rendered" I disagree. I don't see what the advantage of mixing unicode and TeX would be. Why make something that always looks suboptimal, whether TeX is rendered or not? I mean, the result with the rendered TeX is bad enough IMO not to do this. $\endgroup$– Discrete lizard ModApr 12, 2018 at 13:46
-
$\begingroup$ Can you clarify what you mean by "always looks suboptimal"? Say, pulling from your linked question, can you clarify in what ways $Θ(f) = Ω(f) ∪ O(f)$ (
$Θ(f) = Ω(f) ∪ O(f)$) looks suboptimal compared to what you would get with "kosher" TeX inside the mathjax? $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2018 at 13:49 -
$\begingroup$ @EmilioPisanty Well, perhaps always is too strong. But the unicode exponents don't match nicely with the TeX $O$ in my font, while the normal O matches fine. This is apparently not always a problem, as your other example shows, but I think this is problematic more often than not. $\endgroup$– Discrete lizard ModApr 12, 2018 at 13:51
-
1$\begingroup$ And this probabilistic estimate comes from a sample of size $N=2$? Can I suggest that it would be beneficial to give due consideration with suitable time and testing to the technical possibilities offered by the medium, particularly before you go off on a crusade to try and offer prescriptive approaches to the typesetting on other sites? $\endgroup$ Apr 12, 2018 at 13:54