Add Chocolatey LaTeXML test when MiKTeX is installed

[ronaldtse]

According to https://github.com/metanorma/metanorma.com/issues/83 , these packages in LaTeXML depend on external TeX distribution.

color.sty
colordvi.sty
ntheorem.sty
pgfkeys.code
pgfmath.code
siunitx.sty
tikz.sty
xcolor.sty

So the test for testing integration with MiKTeX could use any of these packages, such as ntheorem or color.

For xcolor, @dginev says:

Currently latexml won't stop you from using a package that may require a tex distribution, since in some cases you skirt away from the dependency. For instance xcolor only requires the tex distribution if you use the extended option set, but would be OK without one if you just load it with no options.

Originally posted by @ronaldtse in https://github.com/metanorma/chocolatey-latexml/issues/7#issuecomment-488255590

[CAMOBAP]

@ronaldtse anything else need to be done in the scope of this ticket?

[ronaldtse]

Yes, as described above:

So the test for testing integration with MiKTeX could use any of these packages, such as ntheorem or color.

You need to add a test that uses ntheorem and color that:

• will fail if MiKTeX isn't installed;
• will pass if MiKTeX is installed.

[CAMOBAP]

@ronaldtse can you give me a clue what a test there should be, should I just call latexmlc against some files which use ntheorem or color?

[ronaldtse]

Yes, such as these examples (just 1 tex file for each package is enough):

https://www.dickimaw-books.com/latex/thesis/html/ntheorem.html

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Colors

[CAMOBAP]

@ronaldtse tests added

[CAMOBAP]

I just have checked that this already done in the original latexml project.

They have a matrix with bare (no tex installation) and miktex

So I'm not sure that we need to do this at all.

@ronaldtse let me know what you think about this, should we still proceed?

[ronaldtse]

Well, that’s great. Then we don’t need to do this. Thanks @dnigev !