Should there be some *good* examples on notebook?
Dr. David Kirkby
someone to publish worksheets, there is a section:
"Browse published Sage worksheets
(no login required)"
But often those worksheets are bad examples, error message, or just plain people
experimenting. I do not think they generally reflect well on Sage.
Hence I'd propose that there was a collection of worksheets that always appeared
at the top, with sensible names and good examples. Then let the other published
worksheets be shown below.
Either that, or perhaps make it clear that anyone can edit these worksheets, and
so many not represent how best to use Sage.
One normally associates "published" work as being of high quality. But in this
case the "published" can be anything. Whilst regular users of Sage will know
what this means, for someone taking a quick glance, they are likely to get the
wrong impression.
Robert Bradshaw
A simple rating system would probably let the decent stuff float to
the top (or at least the random, messy experimentation sink to teh
bottom).
- Robert
Alex Ghitza
[...]
> One normally associates "published" work as being of high quality. But in this
> case the "published" can be anything. Whilst regular users of Sage will know
> what this means, for someone taking a quick glance, they are likely to get the
> wrong impression.
That's a good point. I guess in non-Sage-jargon, the current concept is
closer to "public" than to "published". Any thoughts on changing this
adjective? The idea of showcasing brilliant worksheets is of course
very good, but less likely to happen very quickly, since it's much more
work.
Best,
Alex
--
Alex Ghitza -- http://aghitza.org/
Lecturer in Mathematics -- The University of Melbourne -- Australia
Oscar Lazo
I strongly agree! I remember taking the bad impression you described
when I first saw the published worksheets on sagenb.org . I don't
think a rating system would work since there is already one, and it
rarely gets used, sometimes good worksheets get bad rankings and vice
versa. I think it would be best if people would just submit proposed
worksheets for inclusion in the *good* category.
I further propose that some of these get included in new Sage notebook
installs, so that people new to the notebook can inmediately click on
already made notebooks and get some nice code that works. And although
I am geting of-topic, it would be good to include some worksheet
tutorial.
thanks
Oscar
John Cremona
worksheets all still work with each new release?
John
> --
> To post to this group, send an email to sage-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
> URL: http://www.sagemath.org
>
Dr. David Kirkby
>
> On 23 feb, 10:39, "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote:
>> If one sets up a Sage server for public use, there is the opportunity for
>> someone to publish worksheets, there is a section:
>>
>> "Browse published Sage worksheets
>> (no login required)"
>>
>> But often those worksheets are bad examples, error message, or just plain people
>> experimenting. I do not think they generally reflect well on Sage.
>>
>> Hence I'd propose that there was a collection of worksheets that always appeared
>> at the top, with sensible names and good examples. Then let the other published
>> worksheets be shown below.
>>
>> Either that, or perhaps make it clear that anyone can edit these worksheets, and
>> so many not represent how best to use Sage.
>>
>> One normally associates "published" work as being of high quality. But in this
>> case the "published" can be anything. Whilst regular users of Sage will know
>> what this means, for someone taking a quick glance, they are likely to get the
>> wrong impression.
>
> I strongly agree! I remember taking the bad impression you described
> when I first saw the published worksheets on sagenb.org .
I'm glad I'm not the only one to feel this.
> I don't
> think a rating system would work since there is already one, and it
> rarely gets used, sometimes good worksheets get bad rankings and vice
> versa. I think it would be best if people would just submit proposed
> worksheets for inclusion in the *good* category.
Yes, agreed.
Jaap Spies sent me a screen shot some time back, when I first set up a Sage
server on my own SPARC machine. I thought it was pretty impressive, so took his
code and published it on the server running on 't2'.
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/3/
But there is also a published document which shows an error message, which has
since been resolved
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/1/
so that does not give a good impression (This is not aimed at a dig at Robert
who published it. He was trying to show me a problem. It's just an example of
the sort of things that get "published" )
> I further propose that some of these get included in new Sage notebook
> installs, so that people new to the notebook can inmediately click on
> already made notebooks and get some nice code that works.
Yes, I think 30+ decent examples. Hopefully some where you do not need a degree
in maths to know what they are about.
I'm not a mathematician, but have an engineering background. When I look at the
introductory examples for Mathematica, most are easily understood - graphs
plotting, factorization, integration, differentiation, numerical methods,
finding roots, curve fitting to data, etc.
I think there is a bit too much emphasis of the examples of things only
understandable by those with a very good maths background. I've never before
come across the term "ring". To be a viable alternative to the Mathematica at
least, there needs to be more examples of usage by non-mathematicians.
Dave
Ondrej Certik
Yes, we have the exact same problem with the Sage notebook, e.g. if
you look here:
some of the worksheets are really good, and some are really bad. We
want to have some worksheets, that are the "official" way to do some
things. So far we didn't manage to implement any of our ideas either
in the Sage notebook, or codenode, or our own code.
Ondrej
Maurizio
On Feb 24, 2:24 pm, "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kir...@onetel.net>
I totally agree that good worksheet examples would be very useful for
many reasons: having examples, learning small pieces of code from
experienced users, getting a good first impression, etc etc.
> I'm not a mathematician, but have an engineering background. When I look at the
> introductory examples for Mathematica, most are easily understood - graphs
> plotting, factorization, integration, differentiation, numerical methods,
> finding roots, curve fitting to data, etc.
>
> I think there is a bit too much emphasis of the examples of things only
> understandable by those with a very good maths background. I've never before
> come across the term "ring". To be a viable alternative to the Mathematica at
> least, there needs to be more examples of usage by non-mathematicians.
>
> Dave
I strongly agree on this! Even if there's nothing wrong with current
emphasis, I think that there's a lot of potential in non-mathematics,
but other sciences related users. For example, just having good
examples of the well working integration with numpy and scipy would be
very useful, maybe also to catch other problems :)
I have still not a clear idea on which would be a good test case, but
ideally a notebook with some symbolic calculation (using pynac, maxima
or sympy) and further numerical evaluation using large arrays (using
numpy) and possibly also scientific functions, would be VERY
attractive, at least to many people I know.
Regards
Maurizio
Nicolas M. Thiery
> ...and then we would want some way of testing that all the "good"
> worksheets all still work with each new release?
Shouldn't those "good" worksheets simply be the "Thematic Tutorials"
that Minh is currently organizing? All in all, those tutorials are
simultaneously:
- integrated in Sage's documentation
- available through introspection
- automatically doctested
- available as notebooks
The notebook server could include a strongly highlighted link to
Minh's thematic tutorial index. Great notebook published on sagemath
could be voted for integration in the thematic tutorials.
Some of those tutorials could be on the theme "Sage for engineers", ...
Cheers,
Nicolas
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thi�ry "Isil" <nth...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
Carl Witty
<robe...@math.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 2010, at 8:39 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
>
>> If one sets up a Sage server for public use, there is the opportunity for
>> someone to publish worksheets, there is a section:
>>
>>
>> "Browse published Sage worksheets
>> (no login required)"
>>
>> But often those worksheets are bad examples, error message, or just plain
>> people experimenting. I do not think they generally reflect well on Sage.
>
> A simple rating system would probably let the decent stuff float to the top
> (or at least the random, messy experimentation sink to teh bottom).
One very simple change might be easier to implement/use. How about if
there were both a "share" button and a "publish" button, and these
went in to separate sections? I'm guessing that people asking for
help with an error message, etc., would be perfectly happy to choose
"share" rather than "publish".
Carl
Carl Witty
> One very simple change might be easier to implement/use. How about if
> there were both a "share" button and a "publish" button, and these
> went in to separate sections? I'm guessing that people asking for
> help with an error message, etc., would be perfectly happy to choose
> "share" rather than "publish".
Of course, now that I actually look at the notebook, I see that such
buttons already exist. Sorry for the noise.
Carl
David Kirkby
They are different though. If you "share" a document you "share" it
with a number of people, but not the whole world. If you "publish" it,
anyone with access to the server can see it. The problem I find is
that many "published" documents are just rubbish. It does not give a
good impression to see a ton of bad examples of Sage usage published.
I think it would be better i there were some read-only "demonstrations
of good Sage usage", like there for Mathematica.
http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/
I don't see any poor examples of Mathematica usage on the Wolfram
Demonstrations pages, but we allow any old junk to be published.
Perhaps the notebook should have on the front page, something like:
* Demonstrations (examples of good Sage usage)
* Publicly viewable documents (quality varies considerably).
Put 100 demonstrations in the Sage distribution, and make them read-only.
One tends to equate "published" with good quality, but in practice the
published documents can be true junk. This looks like an attempt to
spam, though it was not very effective.
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/20/
Dave
William Stein
The design of this "publish/share" aspect of the Sage notebook is
nearly an exact clone of Google docs "publish/share", at least circa
2007. The one difference is that google docs doesn't have a way to
browse the list of published documents -- the url's it provides for
them are stable urls for the users to post elsewhere.
Thus we could also just make the list of published worksheet not
browsable at all by default, with the one simple change of removing
the "Browse published worksheets" link from the front page.
Obviously, before doing that, we would need to find some good
replacements for the things people do sometimes use that page for,
which is:
(1) go into a room full of students, and
(2) point them at http://server/pub
(3) have them click on the worksheets for today.
A customized pub per users might work to replace this, e.g.,
would list the worksheets I've selected somehow...
Another solution would be to be able to easily publish bundles of
several worksheets together. Then you just tell the students to look
at
for all the workhseets for today.
--
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org
Robert Bradshaw
> On 24 July 2010 08:04, William Stein <wst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The design of this "publish/share" aspect of the Sage notebook is
>> nearly an exact clone of Google docs "publish/share", at least circa
>> 2007. The one difference is that google docs doesn't have a way to
>> browse the list of published documents -- the url's it provides for
>> them are stable urls for the users to post elsewhere.
>
>
> In the context of Google, this publish/share is probably OK, as I
> doubt poorly published documents would been seen by anyone as a
> reflection on Google - no more than poor web sites found with Google
> are seen as a poor reflection on Google.
>
> But with Sage it is quite different.
>
>> Thus we could also just make the list of published worksheet not
>> browsable at all by default, with the one simple change of removing
>> the "Browse published worksheets" link from the front page.
>> Obviously, before doing that, we would need to find some good
>> replacements for the things people do sometimes use that page for,
>> which is:
>> (1) go into a room full of students, and
>> (2) point them at http://server/pub
>> (3) have them click on the worksheets for today.
>>
>> A customized pub per users might work to replace this, e.g.,
>>
>> http://server/pub/stein
>>
>> would list the worksheets I've selected somehow...
>>
>> Another solution would be to be able to easily publish bundles of
>> several worksheets together. Then you just tell the students to look
>> at
>>
>> http://sever/pub/1234
>>
>> for all the workhseets for today.
>>
>> --
>> William Stein
>
> 1) Create a new category "Demonstrations" which has high quality
> demonstrations.Include those with Sage, and make them impossible to
> edit directly within Sage. Nice would be URL's like
>
> http://server/demonstations/number_theory
> http://server/demonstations/linear_algebra
> http://server/demonstations/plotting
>
> in a similar way to what you suggested above with
>
> http://server/pub/stein
Demonstrations would be a good idea. Also, we could do a "worksheet of
the month" or something like that the same way wikipedia does a
photo/article/etc. of the month that's deemed to be of high quality.
> 2) Rename Published -> "Globally Shared"
> 3) Rename Shared -> "Privately Shared"
I like "Published" and "Shared" better.
> I don't see anything particularly wrong with "Globally shared" being
> publicly viewable without logging in, but as long as the front page
> makes it clear these might not be good examples.
>
> So have the front page look like
>
> * Sign up for a new Sage Notebook account
>
> * Browse Sage demonstrations
> (no login required)
>
> * Browse Globally Shared worksheets
> (Warnings, these may be bad examples)
>
> If someone comes along to a Sage server and sees a bunch of tracebacks
> and other error messages, it does not exactly inspire interest.
And they should ideally be tested too. I think *any* kind of rating
system would also help the random, poor quality stuff sink to the
bottom.
- Robert
Robert Bradshaw
> On 24 July 2010 09:38, Robert Bradshaw <robe...@math.washington.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 1:20 AM, David Kirkby <david....@onetel.net> wrote:
>
>>> http://server/demonstations/number_theory
>>> http://server/demonstations/linear_algebra
>>> http://server/demonstations/plotting
>>>
>>> in a similar way to what you suggested above with
>>>
>>> http://server/pub/stein
>>
>> Demonstrations would be a good idea. Also, we could do a "worksheet of
>> the month" or something like that the same way wikipedia does a
>> photo/article/etc. of the month that's deemed to be of high quality.
>
>
>>> 2) Rename Published -> "Globally Shared"
>>> 3) Rename Shared -> "Privately Shared"
>>
>> I like "Published" and "Shared" better.
>
> thread first mentioned months ago, is that in academic circles one
> associates "published" with high quality.
>
> I can't think of any normal use of the word "published" to mean making
> available a set of documents like this.
I guess I'd say one publishes a web page, or blog, or photo album,
etc. to share it with the world.
> But I don't have strong views on this. I do however have a strong view
> that there should be some good examples, and that a casual observer
> can not get the wrong impression by their first encounter with Sage
> being a lot of junk.
>
>>> If someone comes along to a Sage server and sees a bunch of tracebacks
>>> and other error messages, it does not exactly inspire interest.
>>
>> And they should ideally be tested too. I think *any* kind of rating
>> system would also help the random, poor quality stuff sink to the
>> bottom.
>>
>> - Robert
>
> Looking at http://www.sagenb.org/pub/
Right now I can't even get to that page :(. Clearly not what we want
for a first impression :).
> less than 10% of the worksheets have a rating. At that level, I don't
> think its achieving much myself.
>
> Perhaps changing "Rate this" to "Please rate this" might increase the
> percentage of people that rate worksheets. Clearly there is not much
> interest in rating them now.
Are we sorting by rating? If so, it doesn't matter if the bottom 90%
that probably aren't even worth rating are at the bottom. The problem
is that the random first-time-user's ugly code littered with
tracebacks risks being the first thing anyone sees.
The demonstrations could be good pages as well, the question is who is
going to create the content, and ensure that it doesn't go out of
date?
- Robert
Dr. David Kirkby
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 2:24 AM, David Kirkby<david....@onetel.net> wrote:
>> On 24 July 2010 09:38, Robert Bradshaw<robe...@math.washington.edu> wrote:
>>> I like "Published" and "Shared" better.
>>
>> I think the issue I have with "published", which someone else in this
>> thread first mentioned months ago, is that in academic circles one
>> associates "published" with high quality.
>>
>> I can't think of any normal use of the word "published" to mean making
>> available a set of documents like this.
>
> I guess I'd say one publishes a web page, or blog, or photo album,
> etc. to share it with the world.
But one normally does not aim to publish error messages on a web page. If I get
to a web page which shows a PHP error, it does not give one a good impression.
One does not normally publish out-of-focus photos, but selectively publishes
good ones.
For one reason or another, people often publish error messages on Sage documents.
>> Looking at http://www.sagenb.org/pub/
>
> Right now I can't even get to that page :(. Clearly not what we want
> for a first impression :).
Agreed.
>> less than 10% of the worksheets have a rating. At that level, I don't
>> think its achieving much myself.
>>
>> Perhaps changing "Rate this" to "Please rate this" might increase the
>> percentage of people that rate worksheets. Clearly there is not much
>> interest in rating them now.
>
> Are we sorting by rating? If so, it doesn't matter if the bottom 90%
> that probably aren't even worth rating are at the bottom. The problem
> is that the random first-time-user's ugly code littered with
> tracebacks risks being the first thing anyone sees.
Exactly. Though once you have a rating, if things get sorted by that, people can
easily make their items appear at the top. (I'm not sure if Sage lets you rate
your own documents, but even if it does not, you can easily set up an account to
do it).
> The demonstrations could be good pages as well, the question is who is
> going to create the content, and ensure that it doesn't go out of
> date?
There are good examples around on the servers. It's just hit and miss whether
you find them.
I don't think going out of date will be a major problem. If they could form part
of a doctest, then they would be tested that they at least work. It would be
good if a 'depreciate' warning could be raised if the code is depreciated.
In any case, if they were in the form
http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/number_theory/
http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/numerical_methods/
or something like that, someone with knowledge of those areas could have a look
occasionally and flag any problems - if a new largest prime has been found, or
Goldbach's conjecture proven, the page might need an update.
I think aging is a relatively minor problem compared to the much larger problem
of finding a large bunch of error messages.
> - Robert
>
Dave
Robert Bradshaw
There is little motivation for people to make "bad" worksheets, the
kind we're talking about, sort to the top. Mostly it'll be pages
people are proud of. I'm all for some kind of a superuser ranking
ability as well--doesn't have to be 100% peer to peer.
>> The demonstrations could be good pages as well, the question is who is
>> going to create the content, and ensure that it doesn't go out of
>> date?
>
> There are good examples around on the servers. It's just hit and miss
> whether you find them.
>
> I don't think going out of date will be a major problem. If they could form
> part of a doctest, then they would be tested that they at least work. It
> would be good if a 'depreciate' warning could be raised if the code is
> depreciated.
>
> In any case, if they were in the form
>
> http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/number_theory/
> http://www.sagenb.org/demonstations/numerical_methods/
>
> or something like that, someone with knowledge of those areas could have a
> look occasionally and flag any problems - if a new largest prime has been
> found, or Goldbach's conjecture proven, the page might need an update.
>
> I think aging is a relatively minor problem compared to the much larger
> problem of finding a large bunch of error messages.
>
>> - Robert
>>
>
> Dave
>
Jason Grout
> Perhaps changing "Rate this" to "Please rate this" might increase the
> percentage of people that rate worksheets. Clearly there is not much
> interest in rating them now.
Asking people to decide which of 1-5 to rate the worksheet might also be
asking too much (e.g., is this better than the sheet I rated 2
yesterday? Maybe it should be a 4? Or maybe a 3?). Many, many rating
systems these days just have thumbs up/thumbs down choices. Maybe we
should change the rating system to be:
__ thumbs up (or "recommend" or some equivalent)
__ thumbs down (or equivalent)
Of course, this coupled with a page sorting the worksheets by rank will
make the rating system easier and give a bit of incentive.
Thanks,
Jason
Dr. David Kirkby
That sounds sensible, but I can't help but feel we should have some good
examples available on the server for anyone to look at. Those should be there as
soon as the server is installed. If one sets up a new server for a uni course
and tell the students to use it, there will be no examples to start with.
Sage is in my opinion a lot more intimidating than Mathematica to start with.
This is what you get when you start Mathematica
http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/Mathematica-7-startup.png
There's going to get some examples to look at, and they are going to be decent
ones. They make Mathematica look very easy - only later do you find out that its
far from a trivial program to use well.
Dave
Jason Grout
Something like Mike May's Just Enough Sage worksheet would be a good
candidate for this sort of thing:
http://sagenb.org/home/pub/2347/
Jason
Dr. David Kirkby
>> Sage is in my opinion a lot more intimidating than Mathematica to start
>> with. This is what you get when you start Mathematica
>>
>> http://sage.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/Mathematica-7-startup.png
>>
>> There's going to get some examples to look at, and they are going to be
>> decent ones. They make Mathematica look very easy - only later do you
>> find out that its far from a trivial program to use well.
>
>
> Something like Mike May's Just Enough Sage worksheet would be a good
> candidate for this sort of thing:
>
> http://sagenb.org/home/pub/2347/
>
> Jason
Mike's worksheet is the sort of thing I mean. I've not read it in detail, but
just a quick glance I can see its worth reading. Seeing that in a list of
examples would be good, but seeing a bunch of tracebacks and other error
messages is very off-putting.
Likewise I felt William's notebook on The Birch and Swinnerton-Dyer Conjecture
was good.
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/18/
for different reasons. Not because it teaches you much about Sage, but because
it shows some things Sage can do - embed photographs, create graphs, compute
properties of elliptic curves etc.
But seeing things like these below as "published" is in my opinion not good. The
first one looks like a failed attempt at spam.
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/20/
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/1/
http://t2nb.math.washington.edu:8000/home/pub/8/
Dave
mmarco
maybe its true that the public notebook server gets too much garbage.
The rating system should be a solution for this, but clearly, doesn't
work. Maybe just a regular garbage collecting could be usefull. But
then again, we need somebody to do it.
William Stein
> I think the current design fits perfectly for a classroom server, but
> maybe its true that the public notebook server gets too much garbage.
> The rating system should be a solution for this, but clearly, doesn't
> work.
The published worksheets are not ordered by rating by default, but by
"most recent". You can see them sorted by rating by clicking on the
"rating", or going here:
http://sagenb.org/pub/?sort=rating
That unfortunately sorts them from oldest to newest, instead of newest
to oldest.
A moderation system / crowdsourcing is obviously the way to go to
select good worksheets. It's just a matter of implementing it in a
more usable way, and presenting the results by default at /pub.
--- William
> Maybe just a regular garbage collecting could be usefull. But
> then again, we need somebody to do it.
>
> --
> To post to this group, send an email to sage-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
> URL: http://www.sagemath.org
>
--
Dr. David Kirkby
>
> A moderation system / crowdsourcing is obviously the way to go to
> select good worksheets. It's just a matter of implementing it in a
> more usable way, and presenting the results by default at /pub.
>
>
> --- William
IMHO, if a user sets up a Sage server, he should have 20 or 30 decent examples
installed for him to look at. He may never chose to even make that server
public. But some decent examples would still be useful. I think there are enough
decent examples around - they just need collecting in one place, added to the
Sage source code, and made very visible to a new user.
Anyway, that's how I see it. Others no doubt differ.
Dave
Tom Boothby
> examples installed for him to look at. He may never chose to even make that
> server public. But some decent examples would still be useful. I think there
> are enough decent examples around - they just need collecting in one place,
> added to the Sage source code, and made very visible to a new user.
>
> Anyway, that's how I see it. Others no doubt differ.
>
I agree completely -- I think we should pre-load the notebook with a
number of worksheets published. Ideally, these should be added to the
test suite, too.
I just wrote a worksheet that I'd be willing to share in this manner
(and release to public domain, cc, etc). I'll have to add some
documentation, but other than that, it's ready to go.
Tom Boothby
> (and release to public domain, cc, etc). I'll have to add some
> documentation, but other than that, it's ready to go.
Money where my mouth is:
mmarco
On 14 ago, 00:59, "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote:
>
>
> IMHO, if a user sets up a Sage server, he should have 20 or 30 decent examples
> installed for him to look at. He may never chose to even make that server
> public. But some decent examples would still be useful. I think there are enough
> decent examples around - they just need collecting in one place, added to the
> Sage source code, and made very visible to a new user.
>
Dr. David Kirkby
I see two issues.
1) The writing on the boxes overlaps
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/layout.png
2) The equations are not formatted properly.
http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/equation-formatting.png
Is this because I do not have Latex installed? If so, I think we should
strengthen the warning about Latex.
Dave
Tom Boothby
> prepending %time to every cell? The pattern goes naturally with
> "Evaluate All" (Serially, Cellwise and Cumulatively).
>
> Some small nitpicking: Notice sage is returning the word "inchage"
> instead of inches, which is not a word, just like "prepend" is not a
> word yet but should be. :-) Of course I consulted m-w.com not the
> OED, so who knows.
Excellent! Ever since Bush Jr.'s regime started, I've been a huge fan
of inventoring words. I do it quite intentionally. I was going to
return square footage. But I was working in inches, so I malamanteaud
it.
Tom Boothby
>
> 1) The writing on the boxes overlaps
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/layout.png
Yeah, it's hard to get matplotlib to render text how you want it.
I'll play with this some, and see if I can't fix it. OTOH, I'm in the
middle of packing, so I can't promise that I'll get much done on this
any time soon.
> 2) The equations are not formatted properly.
> http://boxen.math.washington.edu/home/kirkby/equation-formatting.png
That's a problem. The published version looks fine for me. It's a
jsmath problem, not a lack of latex. This should look fine, for
example, on a windows box with no latex in sight.
