Problem:The math extension has a lot of bugs, missing features and deficiencies due to the output being images rather than text-like. Most math related websites like math.stackexchange.com use "MathJax out of the box" and do not have these problems. Re-submission of Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Reading/Functional and beautiful math for everyone
Who would benefit: Readers and editors of mathematical articles, books etc.
Proposed solution: In a commission of interested volunteers we came up with a road-map to remove the problematic conversion of "texvc" to standard LaTeX syntax. For a state-of-the-art rendering system we also need to improve the output format. Making it more like "MathJax out of the box" might need additional infrastructure (e.g. to supply web-fonts), needs a long-term maintenance concept and has to work together with almost all software components, so we would like WMF staff to help us.
An example of missing mathematical notation is that required for actuarial functions. See phab:T175673 . -Stelio (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support, since certainly there are bugs. I hope the two archaic Greek letters needed in Ptolemy's table of chords will still work after the improvements. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:45, 21 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support Anything to make contributing and understanding math articles is very welcome, math is hard enough already John Cummings (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bestoernesto: Why oppose? Do you have concerns regarding the roadmap or because you think the other wishes here are more important than providing a math extension that works properly?--Debenben (talk) 19:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]