On 4.5.2011, at 15:10, Robert Goldman wrote:
> On 5/4/11 May 4 -3:03 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> I am rejecting this part of the patch for now. More thinking is needed here,
>> also about special characters etc. No sure yet what the right course will
>> be,
>> but this is m
On 5/4/11 May 4 -3:03 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> I am rejecting this part of the patch for now. More thinking is needed here,
> also about special characters etc. No sure yet what the right course will be,
> but this is much too limited.
Carsten,
I don't fully understand the l
Hi Robert,
I am rejecting this part of the patch for now. More thinking is needed here,
also about special characters etc. No sure yet what the right course will be,
but this is much too limited.
- Carsten
On May 1, 2011, at 6:01 PM, rpgold...@sift.info wrote:
> From: Robert P. Goldman
>
>
From: Robert P. Goldman
---
The previous patch wasn't quite right because, e.g., it would index
#+INDEX: =Class=
as
\\index{=Class=}
instead of
\\index{\texttt{Class}}
This patch attempts to fix that.
Question: would you prefer to have this reformulated as some kind of unified
patch
with the
