Testing equation editor responses

Following Lakshmi’s post on use of three equation editors, and a conversation with AbsentCat about discussion with the author of Equations, I was curious about how differences in formatting assumptions are perceived by users.

Equations implicitly assumes that the host application (word processor, web editor, or whatever) will see to arrangement of completed equations in relation to its own design priorities. MathType, on the other hand, assumes that a given equation system will be arranged according to a chosen set of mathematical conventions, indepenent of the context within which it is to be placed.Both assumptions have arguments in their favour; but they are nevertheless distinct. I wonder whether there is a possible link between them and Lakshmi’s observation that MathType appealed to her verbal side, Equations to her visual sense.

Yesterday I started a small experiment. I am trying out both programs on a class of fifteen year olds typing up a short physics investigation. None of them has used an equation editor before, so they were all given a training session on both products. They have now been told to use one of two otherwise identical laptops, always available in the lab, to type up their work in booked sessions over the next two weeks. One machine has Equations and the other MathType, but neither reveals which until after log in, and I shall randomly switch their positions. I hope that subsequent questionnaires will show what (if any) differences emerge in their responses.

[contributed by Ross]