Latex

[jonathanregert]

What problem are you trying to solve?

Latex formatting like in Obsidian (or vscode plugin)

What should Hubble do?

Add latex support

Current workaround

No response

Examples, references, or screenshots

No response

How important is this to you?

5 — Blocks the workflow

Blocked by

I can't use it for certain tasks

Context

No response

[github-actions]

Triaged as Ready to spec — LaTeX/math rendering is a clear, worthwhile feature that fits Hubble's Obsidian-style markdown editor, but it needs a short design pass before implementation.

What I found:

• The editor (packages/editor) is a custom TipTap (ProseMirror) editor with a remark-parse + remark-gfm markdown pipeline and an explicit markdownToTiptapDoc / tiptapDocToMarkdown roundtrip, plus one node/mark extension per feature (Heading, Link, List, code block, etc.).
• There is currently no math support (no KaTeX/MathJax/remark-math) anywhere in packages or apps.

Why spec rather than straight to implementation — there are real decisions and the change spans the whole markdown roundtrip:

• Rendering library: KaTeX vs MathJax.
• Inline $...$ vs block $$...$$ (likely both) and the corresponding new TipTap node(s).
• Parsing via remark-math and serializing back so the markdown roundtrip stays stable.
• Live-edit UX: show raw source while the cursor is in the expression and render otherwise, matching Obsidian.

Next step: write a short spec covering library choice, the inline/block node design, and the parse/serialize + live-edit behavior, then move it to ready-for-agent.

[bholmesdev]

Automated Codex spec work started for #124. Follow-along link is not available yet.

[bholmesdev]

Opened PR: #135

Spec work completed:

• PRODUCT spec defines inline/block LaTeX math behavior, edit states, fallback/error behavior, and UX validation.
• TECH spec maps implementation to remark-math, KaTeX, TipTap math nodes, Markdown roundtrip tests, and shared desktop/web editor wiring.

Validation:

• pnpm check
• pnpm build:desktop

Note: this is spec-only, so the PR references #124 rather than closing it.

[bholmesdev]

Just drafted a spec document above. If you're interested in discussing details, happy to do so! Otherwise, I expect this to be on the queue within the next few weeks.