On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> wrote:
This is exactly the reasons why I don't want to use csquotes:

     \enquote{something}.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you suggesting the syntax is bad?

But check for instance org-latex-tables-booktabs, which makes optional
support for booktabs.  That kind of support for csquote is of course
OK.  One reason I'd not use this is that the quotes exported to HTML
and LaTeX are no longer in sync.  Which is why I'd rather see
customization through a user smart quote alist.

Okay, that's a fair argument. It would require consistent configuration in more than one place, unless (I think?) Org's LaTeX export automagically use/configure Babel.
 
>  > I think it would make sense to support this for org, and perhaps
>> eventually
>> > make it default behavior. FWIW: I had no idea about this until it bit me
>> > when my LaTeX document suddenly had bogus quotes in it.
>>
>> This has never happened to me, despite extensive usage of LaTeX for
>> almost ten years.
>>
>
> This is a fairly new occurrence, and it is not true for all LaTeXes
> currently available. The motivation is the one that I have given above:

See below.

> quotations are language-specific and semantic markup is preferable.

Org already has semantic quote characters, namely '"' and "'".

Right: I'm talking about TeX and not org-mode there. The semantic way to say "this is quoted" is csquotes and \enquote.

Are those code points U+0022 QUOTATION MARK and U+0027 APOSTROPHE? (I am not an org-mode expert. I'm assuming org-mode does operate on code points, not bytes?)

   \documentclass{article}
   \usepackage{fontspec}
   \addfontfeatures{Mapping=}
   \addfontfeatures{Ligatures=}
   \begin{document}
   ``test''
   \end{document}

Could you share a snip that reproduces your problem?

That appears to compile correctly on my machine as well. Perhaps there is a discrepancy between how I'm building the tex file and how org is building the intermediary tex file. I will investigate :)

thanks again
lvh