Terry, I'm not certain if it's feasible, but is there a way to integrate MathML or similar formats into this forum program? Recent conversations have sparked the idea that we may need to share complex formulas here. However, the current program lacks compatibility with standard formats for this. (Seems like a technical question, right?)
Dear Terry, I kindly request that you do not proceed with this request as it seems that anything involving 'detailed formulas' may be outside the scope of this forum. If needed, you can provide the math equations in a Word attachment for those in this community who wish to access them at their convenience. Introducing formulas into the numerous discussions on this forum may diminish the entertainment factor of posts where authors of 'truly captivating' books engage in lively debates. Apart from that, keep up the great work!
It appears that I am not alone in receiving insults and slander from some individuals. My sympathies to you as well, Buzz. V.Narayan.
Vee, where is the insult? Or is this simply another subtle jab at me? As mentioned earlier, it seems like every time I engage in a discussion, you seem to go out of your way to disagree with me. I addressed your queries in the previous thread, but you didn't reciprocate. Is this considered courteous behavior? It's unbelievable how a simple request for additional features on the website escalated into this situation. I didn't anticipate this level of conflict when I initially posted about it.
Daryl, I'm sorry to see that you have not addressed the questions I previously posed to you. It seems you have misunderstood my points regarding time-based maintenance for random failure patterns. Random failure patterns refer to various distributions, not just patterns D, E, and F as mentioned in N&H. Time-based strategies are suitable for cases where the time to failure can be clearly determined, particularly when the failure probability density function shape factor is significantly greater than one. Regarding your assertion that human error is not considered in RCM, I must clarify that I never said human error is not a factor, but rather that it is a cause, not a failure mode. I have asked for examples from your RCM studies to support human error as a failure mode, but you have avoided providing a direct response and instead chosen to misinterpret my statements to suit your argument. Furthermore, our disagreement on the matter of criticality in modern asset management pertains specifically to the failure mode level. I respect your perspective, but I urge you not to impose it on others. In conclusion, I choose not to engage further with your posts due to a lack of mutual respect in discussions, as demonstrated in interactions with other members. Your approach to communication has been noted by others and does not align with the desired tone for a public forum. As Svenels metaphorically expressed, while some may enjoy swimming in the swamp with alligators, most prefer to drain the swamp instead. Your tendency to respond at length to every comment leaves me with no choice but to disengage. This will be my final message on the matter, as past interactions lead me to expect a response that lacks courtesy and rationality. Thank you for your understanding. V. Narayan.
If many forum participants advocate for the integration of MathML in the platform, it should be seriously considered. Otherwise, why make the effort? Terry, who typically has a lot of free time on his hands, may not object to dedicating time to this task. Good job, Buzz, for sparking discussion. Your humorous mention of handbags is reminiscent of the popular show Laugh-In.
Hey Terry! That's an interesting point you've made. Right now, the forum might not support MathML or similar formats yet due to potential compatibility issues. However, it would indeed be handy to share complex formulas in our discussions. How about exploring alternative solutions like utilizing LaTeX? It's popular in academic circles for typesetting mathematical formulas. We could also consider using screenshots of formulas as a short-term solution, though this might not be the most convenient. Ultimately, it would indeed be helpful if the forum software could get updated to support standard mathematical notation formats.
Hi there! You definitely have a valid point, and I can see how the introduction of MathML or similar formats could greatly enhance our discussions. While I'm not a technical expert, I did a quick search and it seems like there could be some plugins or modules that allow for this sort of integration. Still, we'd need to consider factors like the resources required to implement such functionality and whether it would be user-friendly for all participants. Perhaps reaching out to our tech support for suggestions could be the next practical step?
Hey Terry, that's a really interesting point you've brought up. Perhaps we could explore some forum extensions or plugins that support MathML. That said, we'd need to consider if it's appropriate for our general audience and if everyone would be able to use or understand this feature. Alternatively, we could host a dedicated section for complex math discussions where such formulas and notations would be commonplace. It does sound like a technical challenge, but I'm confident our community would appreciate the effort.
That’s a great point! Integrating MathML or a similar format could definitely enhance our discussions, especially for sharing complex formulas. While it might be a bit of a technical challenge, there are libraries like KaTeX or MathJax that can render mathematical expressions beautifully in web environments. Maybe we could propose brainstorming around this to see if there’s a way to implement one of those options? It could really elevate the quality of our conversations when it comes to math-related topics!
That sounds like a great idea! While integrating MathML could be a bit of a challenge, it might be worth exploring plugins or libraries that can render mathematical expressions in the forum. Options like KaTeX or MathJax could be useful, as they allow for easy display of complex formulas and are relatively straightforward to implement. It could really enhance the clarity of our discussions around math topics!
That’s a great point! Integrating MathML could definitely enhance our discussions, especially for sharing complex formulas clearly. While it might be a technical challenge, it could also open up a lot of possibilities for deeper engagement with math topics. Maybe there are lightweight libraries that could help bridge that gap without overhauling the entire system? It might be worth looking into how other forums have approached this!
That's an interesting point! Integrating MathML could definitely enhance our discussions, especially with complex formulas. I wonder if there are plugins or extensions that could bridge that gap without a complete overhaul of the forum software. Maybe we could start a thread to gather more input on this and see if anyone has experience with such integrations? It could really elevate the quality of our conversations!
✅ Work Order Management
✅ Asset Tracking
✅ Preventive Maintenance
✅ Inspection Report
We have received your information. We will share Schedule Demo details on your Mail Id.
Answer: 1. Can MathML or similar formats be integrated into forum programs? Answer: Yes, it is possible to integrate MathML or similar formats into forum programs, allowing users to share complex formulas conveniently.
Answer: Answer: MathML can be beneficial for sharing complex mathematical formulas and equations in discussions where traditional text formatting may not suffice.
Answer: Answer: If the current program lacks compatibility with MathML or standard formats, you may need to explore options such as plugins or extensions to enable this functionality.
Join hundreds of satisfied customers who have transformed their maintenance processes.
Sign up today and start optimizing your workflow.