From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: [new exporter] 2 questions Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 11:52:36 +0100 Message-ID: <877glzi9or.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87sj4ogr4b.fsf@bye.fritz.box> <87liagjhlm.fsf@gmail.com> <87fw0oxhon.fsf@bye.fritz.box> <87hal4jfuf.fsf@gmail.com> <87a9qwni43.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87ppzr5ms9.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:48983) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9DBQ-0001FO-EI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 06:22:25 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9DBP-0000Xi-0q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 06:22:24 -0500 Received: from mail-we0-x22e.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e]:64261) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U9DBO-0000XP-Qb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 06:22:22 -0500 Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id r6so1223680wey.5 for ; Sat, 23 Feb 2013 03:22:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87ppzr5ms9.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> (Bastien's message of "Sat, 23 Feb 2013 09:21:12 +0100") 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: Bastien Cc: Achim Gratz , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Bastien writes: > Hi Achim, > > Achim Gratz writes: > >> Nicolas Goaziou writes: >>>> It creates this command in the .tex file: >>>> >>>> \#+begin$_\mathrm{multicols}$ >>> >>> It works here. Difficult to say what is wrong in your buffer without >>> more context. >> >> That result looks exactly like my problem with multiline \[...\], >> i.e. the parser found something it considers an element inside the >> multicols block and that made the block itself look like random text >> that needs to be escaped. > > Yes, that's a problem. > > I don't think \[ .. \] constructs and arbitrary blocks should allow > comma-escaping, that would be unreadable. But their content should > not be parsed further as Org syntactic elements. > > Nicolas, how hard would it be to let the parser DTRT here in both > cases? IMO the parser already DTRT. In which case do you think it doesn't? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou