Skip Collins <skip.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Then, what about setting :cbtrans to "\\texttt{[-]}" and
> >> `org-export-latex-list-parameters' to nil, instead of "$\\boxminus$" and
> >> '(:cbon "$\\boxtimes$" :cboff "$\\Box$"), respectively?
> >>
> >
> > I'm fine with that - Skip? Tom? Others? If this does end up being the case,
> > then Skip's \parbox method can be integrated into Tom's LaTeX tutorial
> > or as a separate hack on Worg.
>
> Adding configurability for cbon, cboff, and cbtrans is the most important
> thing.
>
> Philosophically, the whole point of exporting to LaTeX or HTML is to
> take a plain text representation of lists, checkboxes, etc., and turn
> it into a nice presentation format. So I don't quite agree that the
> LaTeX output should mirror the appearance of the org file with a
> monospaced font. If so, then logically list bullets should be exported
> as hyphens. My preference would be that the default LaTeX (and html)
> outputs should use the features of those formats to make the output
> look nice. Within reason, of course.
>
I agree of course, particularly with the last sentence. The question is:
is there some other reasonable default that will satisfy most people's
needs without requiring them to customize? I'm not too worried about the
perfection hounds: they will customize mercilessly and they will
complain if they cannot customize - and I think they (you!) will be
happy with the current solutions. If people vote for \parbox as the
default, I'm perfectly happy with that. The current default however is
indeed ugly and needs to be changed: I think we all agree with you on
that.
I'll try to run the same org file through the two different defaults
and put up some PDFs so people can look at them, but I won't get to it
till late tomorrow.
Nick
