# [texhax] problem with a defined command

Victor Ivrii vivrii at gmail.com
Fri Jan 17 16:51:20 CET 2014

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Lars Madsen <daleif at imf.au.dk> wrote:

> I would guess that the arxiv checks to see if the sources compile and uses
> the abstract on the web page as is.
> Leaving it to the uploader to verify that the abstract is ok online. In
> earlier version (without mathjax) that would make sense,

Actually not as undefined custom macro in the raw source would be puzzling
for the reader. However they could not do anything to prevent this kind of
abuse

Now (from Oct 2013) there is at least a way for the submitter to see if MJ
can process it

> the just display the abstract unprocessed. Seems they have just added the
> mathjax postprocessor at let it run on what ever they have always been
> using.
>

Yes

>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/attachments/20140117/d226dd5b/attachment.html>