Talk:Microsoft Equation Editor: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:21, 2 May 2008

Computing Redirect‑class

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

From usage and numerous statements from Murray Sargent et al. it looks rather like the Office 2007 Math editing capabilities are no longer based on the legacy Equation Editor. Neither the old interface nor the old layout engine are present anymore. This does (in my opinion) strongly suggest that the old code isn't used here. --Joey 23:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that the new Office 2007 math editing capabilities are not based on my company's Equation Editor or MathType, the "old" Equation Editor is still shipped with Office and is used to support equations in legacy documents, a preferred editing UI for some, and also because it works in many more apps than the new feature. For example, Equation Editor works in PowerPoint. Finally, Equation Editor is still shipped with Mac Office as it does not contain their new feature. PaulTopping (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every wikipedia article on softwares written by the company "design science" looks exactly like an advertisement. If the company is editing its own articles, it is sad. That, coupled with the tone of the articles is a violation of several wikipedia polities, like coi, advert, notability. Deego (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deego, if you have specific objections to the language, we would like to correct them. PaulTopping (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 17:18, 2 May 2008 edit PaulTopping (talk \| contribs) 7 edits No edit summary ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:21, 2 May 2008 edit undo PaulTopping (talk \| contribs) 7 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Every wikipedia article on softwares written by the company "design science" looks exactly like an advertisement. If the company is editing its own articles, it is sad. That, coupled with the tone of the articles is a violation of several wikipedia polities, like coi, advert, notability. [[User:Deego\|Deego]] ([[User talk:Deego\|talk]]) 17:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)		Every wikipedia article on softwares written by the company "design science" looks exactly like an advertisement. If the company is editing its own articles, it is sad. That, coupled with the tone of the articles is a violation of several wikipedia polities, like coi, advert, notability. [[User:Deego\|Deego]] ([[User talk:Deego\|talk]]) 17:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

			Deego, if you have specific objections to the language, we would like to correct them. [[User:PaulTopping\|PaulTopping]] ([[User talk:PaulTopping\|talk]]) 17:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)