Stuart Rackham <[email protected]> writes:
>> While I was doing this, I think I have discovered an issue with the new
>> version of blogpost. I tried do this without modifying wordpress.conf
>> (as this is root installed in ubuntu). However, I can't any more. In the
>> past, you could set ASCIIDOC in the blogpost.conf file. This in turn
>> means that I could have asciidoc use an additional .conf file in
>> addition to wordpress. As far as I can see, this doesn't work now,
>> because after the change to asciidocapi; the options are hard-coded.
>
> I'm not sure I understand, asciidoc's conf file locations are independent of
> blogpost, if you put your custom wprdpress.conf file in ~/.asciidoc/ then it
> will be picked up.
Well, I write and contribute toward a number of different blogs; these
have different requirements in terms of markup, and I may want to modify
one blog to, for example, add a macro which inserts an appropriate div
tag into the HTML.
For each blog, I have a conf file for blogpost which sets the user
name/password. In the past, I could also configure asciidoc on a
per-blog basis, by adding "-f thisblog.conf" into the ASCIIDOC
configuration in blogpost.
As an aside, I'd also like to be able to have asciidoc run with -vv --
so that I can see which conf files the asciidoc invocation from blogpost
is calling.
In a nutshell, I need to be able to have blogpost pass configuration
options through to the asciidoc invocation from the blogpost commandline
or the blogpost conf file. I can't see how do this now.
> I think a passthrough macro is probably a better choice:
>
> [macros]
> (?su)[\\]?(?P<name>latexmath):\[(?P<passtext>.*?)(?<!\\)\]=
>
> [latexmath-inlinemacro]
> [latex]{passtext}[/latex]
>
> A drawback with the latexmath:[] syntax is that ] characters in formulae have
> to be escaped, why not use the existing $$..$$ passthrough? These examples are
> equivalent:
>
> $$$latex [[a,b],[c,d]]((n),(k))$$$
>
> latexmath:[[[a,b\],[c,d\]\]((n),(k))]
Yes, you are right, this is much easier. I hadn't thought of this. The
plugin also supports $latex blah$ as a syntax as well as
[latex]blah[\latex].
I'll experiment with this.
>
> Actually they're not quite equivalent the $$..$$ passthrough escapes <>&
> characters (the +++...+++ passthrough does not). I couldn't see any mention of
> how the WP LaTeX plugin handled HTML <>& special characters.
Again, haven't tried this -- I am guessing that it's not a problem --
you can put non HTML characters inside the HTML inside the
[latex][/latex] tags because wordpress replaces in the actual HTML that
gets generated.
> Interesting to note that the WP LaTeX plugin goes the image route instead of
> JavaScript.
Indeed. As you say, it has the major advantage that the rendering is
actually done by latex, and so can be guarenteed. It has the
disadvantage that it's more work to implement and more work to run (the
webserver needs latex for instance, which is 250M package). But as a)
someone else has implemented it and b) the plugin also allows any blog
to use wordpress.com to do the rendering, it's probably the better
solution. The only disadvantage is that the images cannot be cut and
paste, which the mathml should be.
Phil
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"asciidoc" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en.
