Skip to main content
12 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 21, 2018 at 5:56 comment added Martin Sleziak @LSpice I'd guess it is worth linking the post on the main meta also here: MathJax + Markdown rendering in comments.
Jul 20, 2018 at 19:19 comment added j.c. @LSpice Here's a slightly more minimal example: $\cong$— *italics* $\cong$: code $\cong$— *italics* $\cong$. The lack of a space between the MathJax and em-dash is necessary ($\cong$ — italics $\cong$: code $\cong$ — *italics* $\cong$) , and there also must be MathJax on both sides (($\cong$— italics: code $\cong$ — *italics*).
Jul 19, 2018 at 19:31 comment added Martin Sleziak @LSpice I think both possibilities are ok, leaving just this post or making a bug report on Meta Stack Exchange. SE employees check also local metas - it was mentioned recently in this comment - so they should notice your post eventually. However, on the main meta the post would get more exposure. (Moreover, this is not specific just for MO, there are also several other sites that use MathJax).
Jul 19, 2018 at 19:20 comment added LSpice Since we seem to have a reproducible bug, does this post constitute reporting it, or is there some more central repository to which I should report it?
Jul 18, 2018 at 19:05 comment added LSpice (I deleted several intermediate comments exploring various possibilities, and have re-posted a less mangled version of this comment.) Good point; I was just trying to edit down to an MWE. "$\cong$—spacer *particular* spacer—$\mapsto$" seems to exhibit the same effect, but "—spacer particular spacer—" doesn't, so I guess it's the MathJax + em-dash.
Jul 18, 2018 at 17:13 comment added Martin Sleziak @LSpice Regarding the last comment with " —*particular*—" as compared with "— particular —" AFAIK formatting like this works in comments only if surrounded by some characters (spaces, comma, full stop...). You can find a few posts about this on meta, like; Italics markup not working in comments.
Jul 18, 2018 at 15:33 comment added LSpice One more try: is it the dash? —*particular*—. It seems to be.
Jul 18, 2018 at 5:40 comment added Martin Sleziak I don't think that 'centreless' is a consequence of the abstract isomorphism —at least, not obviously so—but rather of the particular isomorphism. (What happens if I omit the MathJax from the comment?)
Jul 18, 2018 at 5:38 comment added Martin Sleziak I don't think that 'centreless' is a consequence of the abstract isomorphism $G \cong \mathrm{Aut}(G)$—at least, not obviously so—but rather of the _particular_ isomorphism $g \mapsto \mathrm{Inn}(g)$. (The same problem is there if we use underscore instead of star for italics.)
Jul 18, 2018 at 5:37 comment added Martin Sleziak I don't think that 'centreless' is a consequence of the abstract isomorphism $G \cong \mathrm{Aut}(G)$—at least, not obviously so—but rather of the *particular* isomorphism $g \mapsto \mathrm{Inn}(g)$. (It seems that the first part of the comment suffices to reproduce the problem.)
S Jul 18, 2018 at 5:37 history answered Martin Sleziak CC BY-SA 4.0
S Jul 18, 2018 at 5:37 history made wiki Post Made Community Wiki by Martin Sleziak