Talk:Homotopy Group is Homeomorphism Invariant

"Is that possible?"

Yes, but it is a bit artificial. The construct is $\! \left[{ \! \left[{ x \ \! }\right] \! }\right]$ IIRC, which does a pretty good job. It is used at various places on the site. We hoped that the new MathJax (the rendering engine) version would bring the commands \llbracket and \rrbracket but sadly they haven't been implemented yet. --Lord_Farin (talk) 13:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This rendition seems to look better: $\! \left[{\!\left[{\, x}\right]\!}\right]$ --prime mover (talk) 14:04, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Apparently Chrome's erratic scaling makes that look like the second bracket is squeezed together. I'd say it's a matter of taste. But since you invented the construct, best go with your suggestion as you've probably used it at all other instances. This way we can ensure that if (when) the direct TeX commands are implemented, the to-be-replaced occurrences are easier to locate. --Lord_Farin (talk) 14:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Both look fine in chrome to me. Is it a possibility to have a load of macros defined globally? I think this was pretty easy when I was playing around with mathjax. This would make it loads simpler (and quicker) to standardise brackets and stuff. --Linus44 (talk) 15:11, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

In general we don't approve such global macros but I think that if we just call them \llbracket and \rrbracket then we should be fine. There is of course the thing with the scaling (can't define macros with remaining open curly braces). Any ideas to attack that? --Lord_Farin (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

There are reasons for not using macros. Any macros will be removed and replaced with the code that they are supposed to replace. --prime mover (talk) 18:23, 9 October 2012 (UTC)