[Orgmode] longlines.el and font color
When I enable longlines-mode (adding soft line-break), the font color reverts to default after the first line wraps. Is there something I can change to fix this? ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] XHTML export - etc.
>
> > - you write C-x 8 SPC in your org files
> > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to on HTML
> > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to ~ on HTML
> > - ~ continues working normally: produces ~ on HTML and \~{} on LaTeX
>
> 100% okay. And you can add:
>
> - \~ will insert ~ in the LaTeX source
>
Yes
> >Sometimes the \ means „don't escape", sometimes not.
>
> Are you okay with this:
>
> Org => LaTeX
>
> \~ => ~
> \% => %
> \# => #
> \{ => {
> \} => }
> \& => &
> \_ => _
> \^ => ^
>
> (i.e. preventing special characters from being converted.)
Mmm... some of those characters /can/ already be written directly
and they won't be interpreted, so you suggest adding a second method
(ex: \# besides # ). Maybe some users find this confusing and prefer
just one way to write each sign.
What do other people think? Should both # and \# write # ?
But your proposal would convert \ into the generic escaping character.
This is good since then you can always write \% (or with any
character of the list) and you know it will be escaped.
But this is bad because this would only work on the characters you
proposed, not on all. Ex \[ would probably write \[ and not [
I would suggest:
1. Using \# just for signs that are part of org's syntax: _ ^
2. Developing a general way to include a literal text without
processing of org's syntax. For instance, the string *word* where both
asterisks should be visible at the exported text (instead of a bold
word). That can be implemented with start-end markers (ex:
some *unprocessed* text) or with a marker before
each sign: (ex: some \*unprocessed\* text).
1 and 2 can be combined if \# works with exactly all syntax
elements, that means, all elements which would otherwise change the
meaning and processing of the text. For instance:
\*
\/
\[
\]
\#
\|
\=
etc.
Of course, also \\ must be present to write a literal \
For the signs which are not part of org's syntax, you wouldn't need
to write \ Ex: \( is unnecesary since ( has no meaning in org.
Sorry for starting anothed discussion :-)
Daniel
___
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] XHTML export - etc.
I should add that the @at-syntax@:
- is too HTML-specific (we need something that exports as good to
LaTeX as to HTML)
- and sometimes it isn't clear what to write. For instance if I want
to write [1] without being processed as a footnote (on a document with
footnotes on); something like @[@1@]@ would
be too complex.
@@Greetings@@ :-)
Daniel
2007/11/9, Daniel Clemente <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > - you write C-x 8 SPC in your org files
> > > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to on HTML
> > > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to ~ on HTML
> > > - ~ continues working normally: produces ~ on HTML and \~{} on LaTeX
> >
> > 100% okay. And you can add:
> >
> > - \~ will insert ~ in the LaTeX source
> >
>Yes
>
> > >Sometimes the \ means „don't escape", sometimes not.
> >
> > Are you okay with this:
> >
> > Org => LaTeX
> >
> > \~ => ~
> > \% => %
> > \# => #
> > \{ => {
> > \} => }
> > \& => &
> > \_ => _
> > \^ => ^
> >
> > (i.e. preventing special characters from being converted.)
>
>Mmm... some of those characters /can/ already be written directly
> and they won't be interpreted, so you suggest adding a second method
> (ex: \# besides # ). Maybe some users find this confusing and prefer
> just one way to write each sign.
>What do other people think? Should both # and \# write # ?
>
>But your proposal would convert \ into the generic escaping character.
>This is good since then you can always write \% (or with any
> character of the list) and you know it will be escaped.
>But this is bad because this would only work on the characters you
> proposed, not on all. Ex \[ would probably write \[ and not [
>
>I would suggest:
> 1. Using \# just for signs that are part of org's syntax: _ ^
> 2. Developing a general way to include a literal text without
> processing of org's syntax. For instance, the string *word* where both
> asterisks should be visible at the exported text (instead of a bold
> word). That can be implemented with start-end markers (ex:
> some *unprocessed* text) or with a marker before
> each sign: (ex: some \*unprocessed\* text).
>
> 1 and 2 can be combined if \# works with exactly all syntax
> elements, that means, all elements which would otherwise change the
> meaning and processing of the text. For instance:
> \*
> \/
> \[
> \]
> \#
> \|
> \=
> etc.
> Of course, also \\ must be present to write a literal \
> For the signs which are not part of org's syntax, you wouldn't need
> to write \ Ex: \( is unnecesary since ( has no meaning in org.
>
>
>Sorry for starting anothed discussion :-)
>
>
> Daniel
>
___
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] XHTML export - etc.
I feel tempted to bring up my suggestion of [markup|text] format
again, but I've been resisting because I feel like a develish nag. So
[*|at-syntax] could still be html specific if you really want
something html specific, but there would be something that could be
portable to all export formats. It would just be a matter of deciding
what 'org' marks should be supported and making sure exporters try to
support them. And of course there are other ways to get around *at
syntax*.
Edd
On Nov 9, 2007 1:59 PM, Daniel Clemente <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I should add that the @at-syntax@:
> - is too HTML-specific (we need something that exports as good to
> LaTeX as to HTML)
> - and sometimes it isn't clear what to write. For instance if I want
> to write [1] without being processed as a footnote (on a document with
> footnotes on); something like @[@1@]@ would
> be too complex.
>
>
> @@Greetings@@ :-)
> Daniel
>
>
> 2007/11/9, Daniel Clemente <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > >
> > > > - you write C-x 8 SPC in your org files
> > > > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to on HTML
> > > > - C-x 8 SPC is exported to ~ on HTML
> > > > - ~ continues working normally: produces ~ on HTML and \~{} on LaTeX
> > >
> > > 100% okay. And you can add:
> > >
> > > - \~ will insert ~ in the LaTeX source
> > >
> >Yes
> >
> > > >Sometimes the \ means „don't escape", sometimes not.
> > >
> > > Are you okay with this:
> > >
> > > Org => LaTeX
> > >
> > > \~ => ~
> > > \% => %
> > > \# => #
> > > \{ => {
> > > \} => }
> > > \& => &
> > > \_ => _
> > > \^ => ^
> > >
> > > (i.e. preventing special characters from being converted.)
> >
> >Mmm... some of those characters /can/ already be written directly
> > and they won't be interpreted, so you suggest adding a second method
> > (ex: \# besides # ). Maybe some users find this confusing and prefer
> > just one way to write each sign.
> >What do other people think? Should both # and \# write # ?
> >
> >But your proposal would convert \ into the generic escaping character.
> >This is good since then you can always write \% (or with any
> > character of the list) and you know it will be escaped.
> >But this is bad because this would only work on the characters you
> > proposed, not on all. Ex \[ would probably write \[ and not [
> >
> >I would suggest:
> > 1. Using \# just for signs that are part of org's syntax: _ ^
> > 2. Developing a general way to include a literal text without
> > processing of org's syntax. For instance, the string *word* where both
> > asterisks should be visible at the exported text (instead of a bold
> > word). That can be implemented with start-end markers (ex:
> > some *unprocessed* text) or with a marker before
> > each sign: (ex: some \*unprocessed\* text).
> >
> > 1 and 2 can be combined if \# works with exactly all syntax
> > elements, that means, all elements which would otherwise change the
> > meaning and processing of the text. For instance:
> > \*
> > \/
> > \[
> > \]
> > \#
> > \|
> > \=
> > etc.
> > Of course, also \\ must be present to write a literal \
> > For the signs which are not part of org's syntax, you wouldn't need
> > to write \ Ex: \( is unnecesary since ( has no meaning in org.
> >
> >
> >Sorry for starting anothed discussion :-)
> >
> >
> > Daniel
> >
>
>
> ___
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: 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
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] XHTML export - etc.
"Eddward DeVilla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I feel tempted to bring up my suggestion of [markup|text] format > again, but I've been resisting because I feel like a develish nag. So > [*|at-syntax] could still be html specific if you really want > something html specific, but there would be something that could be > portable to all export formats. It would just be a matter of deciding > what 'org' marks should be supported and making sure exporters try to > support them. And of course there are other ways to get around *at > syntax*. I would vote against heavily mark-up format like that. I guess the original design of org-mode is to make a simple text file that can make personal information organization much simpler in emacs, as opposed to those half-mark-up languages like emacs-muse. I would suggest to keep current method, which is converting everything that could be converted. To resolve the complication in some circumstances where conversion of `[1]' or `_', `^' and etc. is not wanted, I would propose that we can just use one of the mark-ups, `=code=', and make it be actually `=verbatim='. These are just what I think. Probably there is another way to go: merge with emacs-muse! Xiao-Yong -- c/*__o/* <\ * (__ */\ < ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
