W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-math@w3.org > March 2002

RE: MathType

From: Paul Topping <PaulT@dessci.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 15:54:06 -0800
Message-ID: <46566A3075DDD311969100E0811031ECAF44E8@euclid.dessci>
To: "'Russell Hill'" <rah111@bigpond.net.au>
Cc: www-math@w3.org, Support <Support@dessci.com>
Comments below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Hill [mailto:rah111@bigpond.net.au] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 3:38 PM
> To: www-math@w3.org
> Subject: MathType
> Hi.
> I have downloaded/installed the evaluation versions of 
> MathType, WebEQ and MathPlayer.
> To do a simple test I fired up Word and created a document 
> showing the quadratic equation using MathType. I had some 
> problems but after downloading IE 6.0 they resolved 
> themselves. I think originally having IE 4.0 may have been 
> the problem.

IE 4.0 should have worked, but IE 6.0 is much better.

> Anyway, now the GIF option works fine when using the "Export 
> to MathPage" icon in Word and so does the "Using MathML" 
> option both with MathPlayer and WebEQ (Autosizing), although 
> they have a slightly different look.
> Is using MathPlayer or WebEQ the same thing? By that I mean 
> is one superior to the other in any way or will I end up with 
> ostensibly the same result in either case? Which do you recommend?

MathPlayer is for Windows Internet Explorer only, whereas WebEQ is written
in Java and, therefore, is cross-platform. Because of Java performance
problems, we really don't recommend it for displaying MathML when there are
many equations on a page, as there usually is when working with MS Word

WebEQ is still the right choice for cross-platform, interactive pages where
there are few equations.

> Also, if I use the WebEQ option (as opposed to Autosizing) 
> the formula I created with MathType into the Word document is 
> embedded in a grey box. Is there any reason for this? Should 
> I simply always use the Autosizing option?

I don't know. I will pass this on to our support people. You can also email
them directly at support@dessci.com.

> Finally, when I use the "Using MathML" option I can then 
> clearly see the MathML markup in the HTML file created with 
> MathPlayer or WebEQ, but when I use the GIF option this is 
> not so. Is there any advantage of GIF over MathML or vice 
> versa in terms of creating the HTML for web pages?

With MathML, you'll eventually be able to copy the equations from a web page
into a computer algebra system, like Mathematica or Maple. Also, MathML
enables you to create interactive pages. Of course, you would have to add
your own scripting to the pages generated from Word docs to get any

I would encourage you to read through our pages at
http://www.dessci.com/webmath which discuss the ins and outs of GIF and
MathML and the differences between our products.

Paul Topping

Paul Topping                     email: pault@dessci.com            
                                 phone: 562-433-0685            
Design Science, Inc.             http://www.dessci.com
"How Science Communicates"
MathType, WebEQ, MathPlayer, Equation Editor, TeXaide
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2002 18:54:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:27:32 UTC