Remove the rule for invisible operators in the Kvalidator

[MartheGjelstad]

I am wondering if we should remove the rule for the invisible operators in the Kvalidator.
From my experience, MathCAT does a great job of saying things correctly without any invisible operators.

[samimaattaCelia]

Is the work too much for the operator to be added, or motivation behind this idea? Why would we want poorer markup on these? Not everybody uses MathCAT and maybe in the future this mark up is better to be as good as possible.

If it's too much work for arguably small effect, I'm not opposed to removing it from the Kvalidator.

[MartheGjelstad]

I see many cases where the wrong operator is used. With this rule, you are "forced" to use an invisible operator.
In the guidelines we have written that it's only necessary to use invisible operators when the meaning could be ambiguous Now, for example, the following markup will be flagged <mi>ln</mi><mi>x</mi> cause the invisible function operator is missing.

Maybe the rule just needs to be adjusted.

[MartheGjelstad]

Closed the issue #72 and write the problem here instead.

The following error is flagged in the Kvalidator:

<msup><mi>sin</mi><mrow><mo>−</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow></msup><mi>x</mi>

I don't think it should be an invisible function operator before the exponent.

[MartheGjelstad]

Continue this discussion later. Can't make a decision now.

Kvile fix the problem with the inverse function.