# \big delimiters in scripts are in normal size rather than script size in HTML-CSS output #350

Closed
opened this issue Nov 12, 2012 · 7 comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
Member

### dpvc commented Nov 12, 2012

 Stretchy delimiters created by \big (or \bigl, \bigr, or \bigm) all force scriptsize to 0. I think this was in order to make sure the heights were measured relative to the normal size, but I don't think this is necessary (or should be fixed if it is). The weight of the delimiters is too heavy for the script size the way it currently works. See the StackExchange post that initiated this.

### dpvc pushed a commit to dpvc/MathJax that referenced this issue Nov 27, 2012

 Make \big and its relatives use script or scriptscript fonts (althoug… 
…h size is still absolute, as it is in TeX) so that it balances the text weight in scripts. Resolves issue mathjax#350.
 86c5f1b 
Member Author

### dpvc commented Nov 27, 2012

 The issue350 branch of my fork of MathJax includes a fix for this.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Jan 5, 2013

 This change does not seem to be detected by the LaTeXToMathML tests. The relevant tests are LaTeXToMathML/delimiters/big-1.html LaTeXToMathML/delimiters/big-2.html LaTeXToMathML/delimiters/big-3.html but if I understand correctly, I need to write new tests where the operators are in scripts if I want to see the difference.

Closed

Contributor

### fred-wang commented Jan 28, 2013

  $$X^{\big( \bigl( a \bigm| b \bigr) \big)}$$  I don't see the change in the MathML source but I see that the rendering is different.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Feb 13, 2013

 The changes look ok to me. Should I really write a reftest for this and do you have a suggestion?
Member Author

### dpvc commented Mar 24, 2013

 I don't see the change in the MathML source but I see that the rendering is different. The change is in the HTML-CSS output, not in the MathML itself. Should I really write a reftest for this and do you have a suggestion? I don't think that is necessary. I will merge into develop unless you have objections.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Mar 24, 2013

 I will merge into develop unless you have objections. I'm fine with that. But as I said elsewhere, I'd prefer just removing the code than commenting it out. => Do not write automated test

### dpvc pushed a commit to dpvc/MathJax that referenced this issue Apr 1, 2013

 Merge branch 'issue350' into develop 
Resolves issue mathjax#350.
 c4da088 
Member Author