Hello,
Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: >> Should one want to convert LaTeX images say to an SVG for HTML export, I >> do not think one would want this behaviour to also apply to LaTeX being >> exported to markdown. > > Why do you think so? This is consistent with everything else not > supported by vanilla Markdown. To speak personally, at the moment I use mathjax for HTML. I'm quite content with the markdown output from this patch without what's discussed below. However, if/when I can get the SVG baseline to work with dvisvgm I plan on switching to that for HTML files. However, I'd consider this behaviour undesirable for markdown. The main reason why I'm hesitant about including <img>s in Markdown, is because unlike <table> etc. the output now relies on external files. >> As such I see two 'sensible' paths forward: (1) just include LaTeX >> verbatim when :with-latex is non-nil, or (2) introduce >> `org-markdown-with-latex' which can be set to t/'verbatim or 'html. >> > Obeying to :with-latex property means "ox-md" is somehow actively > handling LaTeX fragments, which was not the initial intent, IIUC. The > first idea was to provide a sensible default for such objects, because > we're outside the specification anyway. I'd rather not overdo it. I'm happy to strip this out of the patch (there's always advice for my own config...), I just thought there may be people who like me are interested in <img>s for LaTeX in HTML, but not in Markdown. -- Timothy
