Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Bastien wrote: > Hi John, > > John Hendy writes: > >> Thanks for the clarification, though regardless of the current >> state... what is the consensus on what it *should* be? The old lingo >> was: >> - #+attr_latex: width=Xcm >> - #+attr_html: width="Xpx" > > ... and the new lingo is > > #+attr_latex: :width Xcm > #+attr_html: :width Xpx > > for images. Images allow :width :height :alt attributes, while other > elements like links and tables allow only the :options attribute. Upon fresh pull to Org-mode version 8.0-pre (release_8.0-pre-146-g73fe0a), I confirm that =#+attr_html: :width value= works as described above. Thanks! John > > I updated ox-html.el so that it respects this syntax. > > Nicolas, would it be okay to make > > (org-export-read-attribute :attr_html element) > > return "title=\"Title\"" instead of nil when the element's attributes > are like this > > #+attr_html: title="Title" > > ? > > Thanks, > > -- > Bastien
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
Hi John, John Hendy writes: > I also tried =:width "5cm"= for images. Despite this being options and > sounding like it needs to be in the :options string instead of :width, > it still works but quoted parts still get quotes =[width="5cm"]= in > the resultant .tex file. If I remove quotes, it works. I removed the quotes in http://orgmode.org/worg/org-8.0.html Thanks for reporting this, -- Bastien
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
Hi John, John Hendy writes: > Thanks for the clarification, though regardless of the current > state... what is the consensus on what it *should* be? The old lingo > was: > - #+attr_latex: width=Xcm > - #+attr_html: width="Xpx" ... and the new lingo is #+attr_latex: :width Xcm #+attr_html: :width Xpx for images. Images allow :width :height :alt attributes, while other elements like links and tables allow only the :options attribute. I updated ox-html.el so that it respects this syntax. Nicolas, would it be okay to make (org-export-read-attribute :attr_html element) return "title=\"Title\"" instead of nil when the element's attributes are like this #+attr_html: title="Title" ? Thanks, -- Bastien
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Aaron Ecay wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> 2013ko martxoak 19an, Aaron Ecay-ek idatzi zuen:
>> I’m sorry, that was a mistake. I sent a patch to the HTML backend to
>> enable this behavior, but forgot all about it. Then when I checked the
>> code, it looked like the functionality was already there! I’ll follow
>> up with Bastien about the patch, and see what its status is...
>
> I was very confused when I wrote this. The patches I had in mind were
> for a different issue. If
> #+ATTR_HTML: :width 200
> ever worked for me, it was only because of me hacking org into a
> chimeric state. I guess you should continue to use
> #+ATTR_HTML: width=200
> or whatever the working incantation for HTML has traditionally been.
>
Thanks for the clarification, though regardless of the current
state... what is the consensus on what it *should* be? The old lingo
was:
- #+attr_latex: width=Xcm
- #+attr_html: width="Xpx"
That made sense to me since that's how they appear in
\blah[width=Xcm]{file.png} or .
With the move to :width value, I guess I'd rather see them work the
same or have it be obviously backend-specific vs. having :width Xcm
for LaTeX, and width=200 for html. At least make it identical to the
actual backend syntax (quotes around the 200 for html) or in pure
babel-esque language to unify (:width value, no quotes) for all.
At least that's my thought from a user's perspective.
Thanks!
John
> Sorry for the noise,
>
> --
> Aaron Ecay
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
Hi again, 2013ko martxoak 19an, Aaron Ecay-ek idatzi zuen: > I’m sorry, that was a mistake. I sent a patch to the HTML backend to > enable this behavior, but forgot all about it. Then when I checked the > code, it looked like the functionality was already there! I’ll follow > up with Bastien about the patch, and see what its status is... I was very confused when I wrote this. The patches I had in mind were for a different issue. If #+ATTR_HTML: :width 200 ever worked for me, it was only because of me hacking org into a chimeric state. I guess you should continue to use #+ATTR_HTML: width=200 or whatever the working incantation for HTML has traditionally been. Sorry for the noise, -- Aaron Ecay
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
Hi John, 2013ko martxoak 17an, John Hendy-ek idatzi zuen: > > #+begin_quote Aaron Ecay > > Eliminating subtleties is precisely the point of this change. All(-ish)* > backends now use :width. > > * As far as I’ve checked, HTML(+ derived backends) and LaTeX(+derived > backends). If there are any that don’t, they should probably be patched > to do so as well. > > #+end_quote I’m sorry, that was a mistake. I sent a patch to the HTML backend to enable this behavior, but forgot all about it. Then when I checked the code, it looked like the functionality was already there! I’ll follow up with Bastien about the patch, and see what its status is... -- Aaron Ecay
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
John Hendy writes: > Thanks, Tom. Having an issue, though. From what I've read/heard... > =:width= is used for all backends now? This seems to be indicated by > this pretty recent post as well: > - http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/68306 > > #+begin_quote Aaron Ecay > > Eliminating subtleties is precisely the point of this change. All(-ish)* > backends now use :width. > > * As far as I.ve checked, HTML(+ derived backends) and LaTeX(+derived > backends). If there are any that don.t, they should probably be patched > to do so as well. > > #+end_quote > > Using #+attr_html :width 200px results in alt="" /> for me. > > Why isn't :width for html being parsed into width="200px" ? > > :options width="200px" works properly... but then again, I thought we > did away with :options var="value" syntax. > > Just trying to keep up! You're ahead of me, John. So far, I've used the latex and texinfo exporters, but haven't looked at the others, so don't have a sense of how uniform things might be across the backends. I'm in awe of the texinfo exporter, though. It does a terrific job, AFAICT. All the best, Tom -- T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists 735 Bishop St, Suite 315, Honolulu, HI 96813 Tel: 808-529-0866, Fax: 808-529-0884 http://www.tsdye.com
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: > Hi John, > > John Hendy writes: > >> >> Am I doing something wrong if this is the behavior I'm getting, or is >> the documentation incorrect and I shouldn't be quoting these options? > > Nicolas cleaned up the attribute syntax recently. Previously, quotes > were needed and backslashes were escaped. Now, quotes are not used and > backslashes don't need to be escaped. Multi-word options are fine > without quotes. > Thanks, Tom. Having an issue, though. From what I've read/heard... =:width= is used for all backends now? This seems to be indicated by this pretty recent post as well: - http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/68306 #+begin_quote Aaron Ecay Eliminating subtleties is precisely the point of this change. All(-ish)* backends now use :width. * As far as I’ve checked, HTML(+ derived backends) and LaTeX(+derived backends). If there are any that don’t, they should probably be patched to do so as well. #+end_quote Using #+attr_html :width 200px results in for me. Why isn't :width for html being parsed into width="200px" ? :options width="200px" works properly... but then again, I thought we did away with :options var="value" syntax. Just trying to keep up! Thanks, John > hth, > Tom > > -- > Thomas S. Dye > http://www.tsdye.com
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
Hi John, John Hendy writes: > > Am I doing something wrong if this is the behavior I'm getting, or is > the documentation incorrect and I shouldn't be quoting these options? Nicolas cleaned up the attribute syntax recently. Previously, quotes were needed and backslashes were escaped. Now, quotes are not used and backslashes don't need to be escaped. Multi-word options are fine without quotes. hth, Tom -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
Re: [O] Confusion about attr_latex and new exporter
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM, John Hendy wrote:
> Just making the transition to the new exporter, finally, today. Just
> some notes regarding the documentation that I wanted to pass along. I
> think there's some possibly conflicting information (or at least
> ambiguous) out there.
>
> - From the Worg page on transitioning to the new exporter
> (http://orgmode.org/worg/org-8.0.html):
> #+begin_quote
>
> Attribute lines now take plists:
> #+attr_latex :width "5cm"
> #+attr_beamer :options "width=5cm"
>
> #+end_quote
>
> However, from a previous email, I think a caveat should be added, as I
> found the above misleading in trying my first test drive of the new
> exporter. I recalled an earlier response on the mailing list to an
> inquiry I had about the old exporter, which evolved into some
> discussion about the new one:
> - http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-02/msg00850.html
>
> So, as this pertains to the transitioning guide: using =:width= as an
> example of the new syntax is perhaps a bad idea since it's heavily
> associated with #+attr_latex: width=Xcm for images and yet is
> incorrect for image attributes. At the very least, some further
> specification of the :width option should probably be referenced right
> then and there.
>
> Another fantastic quote one might consider adding, which really helped
> make things "click" for me is from the same thread a bit later:
> - http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2013-02/msg00882.html
>
> #+begin_quote Nicolas
>
> An argument within curly brackets gets its own keyword. Optional arguments
> are stuffed within an `:options' keyword.
>
> #+end_quote
>
> That's quite helpful!
> - \begin{tabular}{align=blah} --> :align "blah" (curly gets :keyword)
> - \includegraphics[width=blah]{file.jpg} --> :options "width=blah"
> (optional gets :options)
>
> Now, even having digested some of this a bit better, using any syntax
> option (at least that I can tell is correct from the above) with
> quotes yields quotes in the resulting .tex file and a resultant fail
> of pdflatex compilation.
>
> In other words:
>
> - Org:
> attr_latex: :options "width=5cm"
> [[file.jpg]]
>
> - LaTeX:
> \includegraphics["width=5cm"]{file.jpg}
>
> - Org
> attr_latex: :align "lp{4cm}"
> | column 1 | column 2 |
>
> - LaTeX:
> \begin{tabular}{"lp{4cm}"}
>
> I also tried =:width "5cm"= for images. Despite this being options and
> sounding like it needs to be in the :options string instead of :width,
> it still works but quoted parts still get quotes =[width="5cm"]= in
> the resultant .tex file. If I remove quotes, it works. That's fine,
> but not sure if I'll ever run into any multi-word option occurrences
> where I'll possibly need quotes to differentiate one set of option
> values from another (don't think I've run into this before, but just
> thinking out loud).
>
> Am I doing something wrong if this is the behavior I'm getting, or is
> the documentation incorrect and I shouldn't be quoting these options?
>
>
> Thanks,
> John
Sigh. Just when I thought I'd done my due diligence, I [re]found this:
- http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/68256
Which points to this:
- http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/68011
Talk about a fairly massive amount of time to discover that it's
simply using the babel syntax =:width value= (no quotes). I'll state
that the announcement (second link above) is still confusing to me, as
Nicolas has stated:
#+begin_quote
>From the user POV, it removes necessity to quote or escape characters.
For example, these are now valid:
#+attr_latex: :font \footnotesize :align |l|c|c|
#+attr_foo: :prop var="value" :another-prop nil
#+end_quote
Thus, I would have expected =#+attr_latex :options width="value"= to
work, but it doesn't. Seems like :width is being treated specially, or
did I just not parse =:prop var="value"= correctly?
Thanks,
John
