Re: [O] Japanese popularity of orgmode

[heroxbd]

Hey Tory,

torys.ander...@gmail.com (Tory S. Anderson) writes:

 There seems to be (and has been for a while) a growing Japanese
 presence online with orgmode materials, documentation, addons,
 etc. Most recenlty I found this blog:
 http://paper.li/highfrontier/1300501273 . I had also noticed many of
 the page titles on the orgmode website/wiki had Japanese content. This
 has me curious. Does anyone know the story of what's causing it to
 take off in Japan, or whether taking off is even the right word? Is
 it just a few people or a department at a university that are using
 it?

Well, just my 2 cents.  I attended a Japanese university and wrote my
PhD thesis in org-mode.

Cheers,
Benda

Re: [O] [PATCH] curly nested latex fragments

[heroxbd]

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr writes:

 hero...@gentoo.org writes:

 Nicolas Goaziou m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr writes:

 I do not mind extending syntax for LaTeX macros a bit if it helps users,
 but first, I would like a clear definition of what subset of macros
 should be supported in Org.

 See, for example,

   http://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html#Entities_and_LaTeX_Fragments

 \ce{^{238}U} falls into \NAME POST, doesn't it?

 Sorry I wasn't clear. I suggested to not use a regexp to describe the
 syntax, as regular expressions may not be sufficient to describe the
 object. Try to use something like the link above.

 Also, bear in mind that a complicated regexp slows down parsing.

Wow that's exactly what I was wondering when reading
org-element--parse-{elements,objects}.  It is a tokenizer in lexical
analysis, for which great tools exist for decades.

 Ha, I don't even aware of ... syntex as a part of the LaTeX macro; I
 just copied the regex from org-latex.el.  So let's strip it out, and
 advise the users to use explicit LaTeX block for ... constructs.

 + (looking-at (concat
 +  \\([a-zA-Z]+\\*?\\)
 +  \\(?:\\[[^][\n]*?\\]\\)*
 +  \\( (org-create-multibrace-regexp { } 3) 
 \\)\\{1,3\\}))

 Unfortunately, this is ambiguous with Org macro syntax.  For example, it
 would match:

   \alpha{{{macro(arg)}}}

 which is an entity followed by a macro.

Err, insert a white space?

   \alpha {{{macro(arg)}}}

Or expand the macro before latex-or-entity matching.

 Do you mean this[2] and this[3] threads?  I've read them through, and
 remotely understood the difficulty coming from the ambiguity of the
 syntax.  And as discussed above, the difficulty manifests in the
 definition of LaTeX fragments, too.

 There is no ambiguity in LaTeX fragments, as Org is not required to
 support full raw LaTeX syntax (and never did anyway), as long as we
 provide markup to insert LaTeX in the buffer anyway.

 If we can support a bit more without introducing corner cases, that's
 fine. But, as you say, that's just syntactic sugar, so pure Org syntax
 goes first.

I agree with you on this.

 At the same time, these syntax sugar is great.  And that's the reason
 why we prefer org-mode in composing LaTeX to pristine LaTeX.  There is a
 sincere need to compromise the cleanness of the implementation for the
 sake of an ambiguous-but-human-intuitive syntax.

 @@l:\ce{^{238}U}@@ is not so bad, nor is {{{ce(^{238)U)}}} with
 a properly defined macro template.

 Anyway, let me stress it again: a change to macro syntax is fine if it
 introduces no ambiguity. Obviously, the same holds for
 sub/superscript.

Hmmm, after reflection, my preference of \ce{^{238}U} comes from the
syntax of org-mode 7.9.

 To resolve this dilemma, we need a formal (mathematically rigorous) org
 syntex specification, like the rules drafted in

   http://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html#Entities_and_LaTeX_Fragments

 together with a set of test suites to demonstrate the spec.  There would
 be a lot of work, but we could start from embedded LaTeX fragments and
 super(sub)scripts/underline.

 It might be mentally overwhelming for one single guy to do the spec and
 the implementation at the same time, because they require different
 mindsets.  The spec is long term and should be stable while the
 implementation is always being optimized.  After all, it is considered
 good practice to make the two processes independent to each other.

 I'm not sure what do you mean. org-syntax.html describes, well, the
 syntax (although it could be better, with, e.g., EBNF, help is welcome),
 org-element.el implements it, with optimizations, and
 test-org-element.el tests the implementation.

Sorry, it's my ignorance.  I didn't notice the tests/ dir.  So great
that the testing framework is already there.

 Anyway, let's concentrate on LaTeX macros.

Okay.

Cheers,
Benda

Re: [O] [PATCH] curly nested latex fragments

[heroxbd]

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr writes:

 Hello,

 hero...@gentoo.org writes:

 Nesting braces is already implemented in the classic org-latex.el[1],
 and is forward ported into org-element.el.

 Thanks for your patch.

 I think you are misunderstanding something. I didn't port this
 limitation in Org 8. AFAIK it has been there for a long time. See
 `org-inside-latex-macro-p' for example.

 The main problem with Org  8 is that every exporter implemented its own
 parser for the Org buffer. As you can see, org-latex.el was in
 contradiction with org.el.

I see, the regex used for latex protection (in org-latex.el) and
footnote guarding (org-footnotes.el org.el) are different.

 Would you like to take a look at the attached patch? Thanks.

 I do not mind extending syntax for LaTeX macros a bit if it helps users,
 but first, I would like a clear definition of what subset of macros
 should be supported in Org.

 See, for example,

   http://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html#Entities_and_LaTeX_Fragments

\ce{^{238}U} falls into \NAME POST, doesn't it?

 Also, I do not want to add constructs like

   \\(?:[^\n]*\\)*

 in this definition, as this isn't supported even in
 `TeX-find-macro-end-helper' (from auctex), which I consider as
 a reference for macro syntax (i.e. we shouldn't support more than what
 is supports).

Ha, I don't even aware of ... syntex as a part of the LaTeX macro; I
just copied the regex from org-latex.el.  So let's strip it out, and
advise the users to use explicit LaTeX block for ... constructs.

+ (looking-at (concat
+  \\([a-zA-Z]+\\*?\\)
+  \\(?:\\[[^][\n]*?\\]\\)*
+  \\( (org-create-multibrace-regexp { } 3) \\)\\{1,3\\}))


 Eventually, please note that this imply to change not only
 org-element.el, but also org.el and possibly other parts where the
 limitation is encoded. But first, we need to agree on what exactly
 a valid a LaTeX macro is in Org.

`org-inside-latex-macro-p' for example? Yeah, definitely.

 If \ce{^2H} works as above, it is not a problem for me.  Although make
 it configurable is more user-friendly; ^:{} is already there afterall,
 adding another style feels natural.

 It's not about adding another style. ^:{} allows less (without
 changing syntax, because the limitation is done at the export level),
 you want to allow more, which implies to change syntax. I don't want the
 latter to be configurable.

 I explained in this thread why it wasn't possible, for the time being,
 to allow a blank character before sub or superscript. This was discussed
 on this ML, you may want to search archives.

Do you mean this[2] and this[3] threads?  I've read them through, and
remotely understood the difficulty coming from the ambiguity of the
syntax.  And as discussed above, the difficulty manifests in the
definition of LaTeX fragments, too.  It is frustrating to deal with
these corner cases, making a well-designed parser framework unnecessary
complex.

At the same time, these syntax sugar is great.  And that's the reason
why we prefer org-mode in composing LaTeX to pristine LaTeX.  There is a
sincere need to compromise the cleanness of the implementation for the
sake of an ambiguous-but-human-intuitive syntax.

To resolve this dilemma, we need a formal (mathematically rigorous) org
syntex specification, like the rules drafted in

  http://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html#Entities_and_LaTeX_Fragments

together with a set of test suites to demonstrate the spec.  There would
be a lot of work, but we could start from embedded LaTeX fragments and
super(sub)scripts/underline.

It might be mentally overwhelming for one single guy to do the spec and
the implementation at the same time, because they require different
mindsets.  The spec is long term and should be stable while the
implementation is always being optimized.  After all, it is considered
good practice to make the two processes independent to each other.

What do you think?

Yours,
Benda

1. 
http://orgmode.org/w/?p=org-mode.git;a=commit;h=88cf58802cc35dee2bc8ff8633b5c842fa7a23b3
2. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/79735
3. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/85902

[O] Bug: [regression] superscript not available after non-alphanumeric [8.2.7b (8.2.7b-dist @ /home/benda/gnto/usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/org-mode/)]

[heroxbd]

superscript after non-alphanumeric, primarily used for isotopes, is
broken again[1, 2].

#+begin_org
  \ce{^{238}U}, ^2H
#+end_org

is exported as

#+begin_latex
  \ce\{$^{\text{238}}$U\}, \^{}2H
#+end_latex

on org-mode 8.2.7b

I've also tried 8.0.7, the bug persists. So I suppose the regression is
introduced by 8.0 exporter refactorization.

How about making a set of unit tests for the exporter to watch against
these?

Cheers,
Benda

1. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2009-09/msg00887.html
2. 
http://orgmode.org/cgit.cgi/org-mode.git/commit/?id=7d5408a717374641b2d2cddcfef27ec9c137a9a7
  
current state:
==
(setq
 org-ctrl-c-ctrl-c-hook '(org-babel-hash-at-point 
org-babel-execute-safely-maybe)
 org-latex-format-headline-function 'org-latex-format-headline-default-function
 org-src-fontify-natively t
 org-html-format-inlinetask-function 'ignore
 org-export-with-drawers nil
 org-export-copy-to-kill-ring t
 org-export-with-tags 'not-in-toc
 org-export-preprocess-before-selecting-backend-code-hook 
'(org-beamer-select-beamer-code)
 org-tab-first-hook '(org-hide-block-toggle-maybe 
org-src-native-tab-command-maybe
  org-babel-hide-result-toggle-maybe 
org-babel-header-arg-expand)
 org-modules '(org-bbdb org-bibtex org-docview org-gnus org-info org-jsinfo 
org-irc org-mew org-mhe org-rmail
   org-special-blocks org-vm org-wl org-w3m)
 org-cycle-hook '(org-cycle-hide-archived-subtrees org-cycle-hide-drawers 
org-cycle-hide-inline-tasks
  org-cycle-show-empty-lines 
org-optimize-window-after-visibility-change)
 org-agenda-before-write-hook '(org-agenda-add-entry-text)
 org-speed-command-hook '(org-speed-command-default-hook 
org-babel-speed-command-hook)
 org-ascii-format-inlinetask-function 'org-ascii-format-inlinetask-default
 org-babel-pre-tangle-hook '(save-buffer)
 org-occur-hook '(org-first-headline-recenter)
 org-export-latex-after-blockquotes-hook 
'(org-special-blocks-convert-latex-special-cookies)
 org-latex-default-packages-alist '((T1 fontenc nil) ( graphicx t) ( 
longtable nil)
( float nil) ( wrapfig nil) ( 
soul t) ( textcomp t)
( marvosym t) ( latexsym t) ( 
amssymb t) ( hyperref nil)
( fontspec nil) (CJKchecksingle 
xeCJK nil) \\tolerance=1000
\\setCJKmainfont[BoldFont={WenQuanYi Zen 
Hei},ItalicFont={AR PL UKai CN}, FallBack={AR PL UMing CN}]{Kochi Mincho} 
\\setCJKsansfont{AR PL UKai CN})
 org-html-format-headline-function 'ignore
 org-metaup-hook '(org-babel-load-in-session-maybe)
 org-confirm-elisp-link-function 'yes-or-no-p
 org-export-latex-format-toc-function 'org-export-latex-format-toc-default
 org-latex-classes '((article \\documentclass[11pt]{article} 
(\\section{%s} . \\section*{%s})
  (\\subsection{%s} . \\subsection*{%s})
  (\\subsubsection{%s} . \\subsubsection*{%s})
  (\\paragraph{%s} . \\paragraph*{%s}) 
(\\subparagraph{%s} . \\subparagraph*{%s}))
 (thesis \\documentclass[12pt,final]{tohoku-thesis}
  (\\chapter{%s} . \\chapter*{%s}) (\\section{%s} . 
\\section*{%s})
  (\\subsection{%s} . \\subsection*{%s})
  (\\subsubsection{%s} . \\subsubsection*{%s}))
 (book \\documentclass[11pt]{book} (\\part{%s} . 
\\part*{%s})
  (\\chapter{%s} . \\chapter*{%s}) (\\section{%s} . 
\\section*{%s})
  (\\subsection{%s} . \\subsection*{%s})
  (\\subsubsection{%s} . \\subsubsection*{%s}))
 (beamer \\documentclass{beamer} org-beamer-sectioning)
 (revtex 
\\RequirePackage{fixltx2e}\n\\documentclass[11pt, reprint]{revtex4-1}
  (\\section{%s} . \\section*{%s}) (\\subsection{%s} 
. \\subsection*{%s})
  (\\subsubsection{%s} . \\subsubsection*{%s})
  (\\paragraph{%s} . \\paragraph*{%s}) 
(\\subparagraph{%s} . \\subparagraph*{%s}))
 )
 org-latex-format-drawer-function '(lambda (name contents) contents)
 org-export-preprocess-after-blockquote-hook 
'(org-special-blocks-make-special-cookies)
 org-format-latex-options '(:foreground default :background default :scale 1.7 
:html-foreground Black
:html-background Transparent :html-scale 1.0 
:matchers
(begin $1 $ $$ \\( \\[))
 org-latex-to-pdf-process '(latexmk -f -pdf %f)
 org-babel-tangle-body-hook '((lambda nil (org-preprocess-apply-macros)))
 org-clock-out-hook '(org-clock-remove-empty-clock-drawer)
 org-export-latex-classes '((article \\documentclass[11pt]{article} 
(\\section{%s} . \\section*{%s})
 (\\subsection{%s} . \\subsection*{%s})
 (\\subsubsection{%s} . \\subsubsection*{%s})

[O] syntax specification (was Re: Bug: [regression] superscript not available after non-alphanumeric)

[heroxbd]

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr writes:

 If you want to insert raw LaTeX in an Org buffer, then \ce{^{238}U} is
 invalid because you cannot nest braces. You can write instead:

   @@latex:\ce{^{238}U}@@

 or you can define a macro, e.g.,:

   #+MACRO: ce @@latex:\ce{$1}@@

 and then use

   {{{ce(^{238}U)}}}

 Also, ^2H is not recognized as superscript _on purpose_. Per Org syntax,
 you have to add a non-blank character before the caret. Otherwise, there
 would be ambiguity between underline (e.g., _under_) and subscript
 (_under). And superscript syntax follows subscript's.

 In this case, you can probably use a math snippet, e.g.,

   \(^2\)H

Thank you for the explanation.  I got to know what went wrong.

I am wondering where the claims you cannot nest braces and Per Org
syntax, you have to add a non-blank character before the caret come
from.  Is there a general principle guideline for the org syntax, or is
it a taste of the maintainer only?

Is it true when an exporter maintainer changes, the syntax changes to
his somehow incompatible preference?  In [1], Carsten regarded you have
to add a non-blank character before the caret as a bug and fixed it;
while you regard it as a rule.  I am curious about what was the
compelling motivation to make this shift.

Interpreting \ce{^{238}U} directly complicates the exporter parser
logic, while gives LaTeX composers a syntax sugar.  The inconvenience of
\(^2\)H is similar to \_leading_under_line.  Either syntax is not
superior to the other.  Maintaining a stable syntax is the principle in
this case.

Don't get me wrong.  I appreciate and respect your new-school exporting
framework, and the sexy features it makes possible.  I am to express my
value and concern on the longterm specification (and consequently
usability) of the org syntax.

Cheers,
Benda

1. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2009-09/msg00887.html