the image shows in fact that (on the examples shown) firefox rendering is pretty comparable to TeX’s. Of course using scalable fonts makes them appear far better than a bitmap image even if that image is TeX generated. Accessibility such as audio and braille support id also vastly easier from mathml than from embedded images in a web page. So html+MathML is almost always going to look better (in a browser that supports it) than html+images. The other viable alternative is pdf where of course you gain most from Tex typesetting (The pdf version of the MathML spec is set with LaTeX)
> which, it should be noted, has not not been updated since July 2010

yes sorry we’ve been a bit preoccupied getting the spec out, there are several updates planned for the website.

Of course for printed medium TeX still beats printing from a browser easily.

As for no one using it, we’ll see but NIST’s DLMF (http://dlmf.nist.gov/)

and mathscinet (aka online math reviews) are two big users (mathscinet uses tex markup converted on the fly to mathml via mathjax) http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/help/about.html

]]>