Hi Nicolas On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > The error should be fixed.
Fix confirmed, thank you. The ERT you added for this makes me wonder again: What is the status of #+NAME for tables? Initiated by a discussion on the list some time ago I thought I could and would better migrate all my #+TBLNAME to #+NAME but since it still does not work for remote references like this #+TBLNAME: table | 42 | | 42 | #+TBLFM: $1 = remote(table, @1$1) I thought I did not understand the development of #+NAME. Are remote references supposed to work also with #+NAME for tables? Michael
