I was going to fix the issues described in the first reply - not
enough items in particular - and resubmit soon. I got a bit
distracted by finals. I'll see if I can figure out the export
problem, as well.
Thanks,
Nathaniel Flath
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 5:44 AM, Jacob Mitchell
<jacob.d.mitch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Bernt Hansen <be...@norang.ca> wrote:
>>
>> Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Jul 29, 2010, at 10:27 PM, Nathaniel Flath wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello all,
>> >>
>> >> One thing that had been bugging me was the inability to have an
>> >> ordered list of the form:
>> >>
>> >> a. Item 1
>> >> b. Item 2
>> >> c. Item 3
>> >>
>> >> The following patch enables this, with lists going from a-z and A-Z.
>> >> Let me know if there are any issues with it.
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I am not really sure we need these. They cause problems when lists get
>> > really long - also you patch does not further than "z", after that I
>> > get "{".
>> >
>> > Furthermore the export backends implement their own numbering
>> > rules anyway. So it seems to me that we do not need this addition.
>> >
>> > Any other votes here?
>>
>> I'm not currently missing this feature. I think it definitely would
>> have to handle more entries if this was to be included in org-mode.
>
> I agree, that would be nice.
>
>>
>> Maybe going something like
>>
>> a.
>> b.
>> ...
>> z.
>> aa.
>> ab.
>> ...
>> az.
>> ba.
>> bb.
>> ...
>> zz.
>> ... and if you really need more entries than that (unlikely) you can
>> do
>> aaa.
>> aab.
>> ...
>> and just keep going indefinitely.
>
> As a practical matter we should consider whether it's worth making a
> non-terminating sequence that can be handled by the exporters. LaTeX's
> enumerate package doesn't like going beyond (z):
>
> \documentclass[letterpaper]{article}
> \usepackage{enumerate}
>
> \begin{document}
> \begin{enumerate}[(z)]
> \item
> ...
> \end{document}
>
> The items beyond the 26th are mapped to "()".
>
> Of course there are going to be ways around these issues, but the question
> is whether it's desirable enough to implement and maintain that. Either way
> is fine with me--I'm new on the mailing list and haven't done any
> development for org-mode yet.
>
> -Jake
>>
>> -Bernt
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
>
_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
