As I understand it (which isn’t very far), the addition of MathJaX to instiki is to enable those who can’t already read the MathML to at least see something reasonable. MathJaX knows absolutely nothing about iTeX, what it does is translate the MathML into HTML+CSS. So on instiki, the workflow is:

- Author types itex syntax
- Instiki (via itexToMML) translates that to MathML
- Decent browser (or broken browser with correct plugin) renders MathML, or
- Broken browser invokes MathJaX,
- MathJaX converts MathML to HTML+CSS
- Broken browser renders HTML+CSS

The point is that MathJaX can run in several modes:

- TeX-like syntax -> HTML+CSS (default on MO)
- TeX-like syntax -> MathML (option on MO for those with decent browsers)
- MathML -> HTML+CSS (default on Instiki)

(there may be more)

So for other pages, you should investigate whether or not it is possible to run MathJaX on them via something like a GreaseMonkey script. I don’t know anything about that. It is nothing to do with itex.

The only other thing to be ware of is that MathJaX is inferior to native rendering in many respects. So if you are regularly using a MathML-enabled site, you should use a MathML-enabled browser.

]]>Does this impact blogs, forums, etc that use itex? For example, can people who do not wish to install additional fonts read the nCafe without gobbledegook symbols appearing? How about Wordpress?

]]>I think most nLab pages use plenty of MathML…

]]>Are there n-lab pages that are notoriously difficult to see without MathML?

]]>Instiki now has MathJaX, for those with browsers that don’t support MathML (either natively or via an extension).

I don’t know exactly how it decides which browsers need it, so anyone who figures out more would be doing us all a favour by recording their experiences with it.

But now there should be *no excuse* for not being able to see an nLab page!