From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suvayu Ali Subject: Re: [bug] new beamer exporter always adds default width to graphics Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 23:17:26 +0100 Message-ID: <20130312221726.GG8127@kuru.dyndns-at-home.com> References: <20130312145955.GD8127@kuru.dyndns-at-home.com> <87boaocvgo.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33458) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFXa3-0004bB-JT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:25:53 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFXVj-0006xf-V3 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:21:50 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f42.google.com ([74.125.83.42]:51318) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UFXVj-0006xb-OY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:17:31 -0400 Received: by mail-ee0-f42.google.com with SMTP id b47so166308eek.29 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 15:17:31 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87boaocvgo.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Aaron, On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 02:40:55PM -0400, Aaron Ecay wrote: > Hi Suvayu, > > 2013ko martxoak 12an, Suvayu Ali-k idatzi zuen: > > I believe Nicolas mentioned sometime back the :width option is available > > only for floats whereas :options is the only way for included graphics > > files (because of how LaTeX works). This addition is a bit inconsistent > > with that line of thought. > > I helped write this change, so that org could support kinds of graphics > where the width is not specified by an options string, but rather by > another means. The new syntax is hopefully more consistent in the long > run: one uses :width to set the width of anything. > > Nicolas and I originally discussed a transition period where the default > :width would not be inserted, but ultimately we decided to just go ahead > with the change. The new exporter is after all not yet stable, though > thanks to the fantastic effort of the community it is continually > improving. That is understandable, but if the aim is to support other kinds of graphics that support :width, I expect the change to not interfere with graphics that do not support it. I think there are two cases here: 1. the author targets the document for a specific backend that does not support :width 2. the author expects to export to multiple backends and wants to be as general as possible so uses and expects :width to work. So now the question is, is it reasonable to expect the author in case (1) is aware of this subtlety and use :width even though her/his backend does not support it, or would it be better to handle these deficient cases "specially" and help the author by not clobbering their :options argument. I hope I expressed myself clearly. Cheers, -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.