From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms13.migadu.com with LMTPS id OK1DO74yeWfoIgEAe85BDQ:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 13:08:15 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:4876::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2.migadu.com with LMTPS id OK1DO74yeWfoIgEAe85BDQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:08:15 +0100 X-Envelope-To: larch@yhetil.org Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b="SLVtP/r2"; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=posteo.net ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1735996094; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=c30HjRpwh3C0CGWEjskmYFNTxNjXoMjJAaQaKLsWTZI=; b=F703DyyvBm7yQM6lx4xa0AJcD3AMvhBvLw+rHHPnxAc2wu5rfDrG/GriLKLGUKsZCnp5VF R8DPZIUvhJYSBKqeYklZcRMyu/KsveeLtXyB1X6Iu4ue/qkMcp8UwvZmWHTBmx/Gz9ixvr MFuwQCgiCLAKH7KRixP35RABf+Ynb80tuLvBQMMgef2BlzC9LpjGiAlDFRjSwl45bW/LfE wJMQiGLnvvBO/lw1dzBndYJNA9uN74BMGn2N7TeIz+oepNjba6xw06DsLvFKQpb+pH7ddL SJhR1grT59LfrDnqoE8esVAFHXTkyP0vnpoAAdKxBFcHR6cGaBATJRSEarye9w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=posteo.net header.s=2017 header.b="SLVtP/r2"; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org"; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=posteo.net ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1735996094; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=HjZMO8Ugwqj8x0A5AXZ7iOcJu8bjOSMb9LbSw2TFB9blv4scKAleEf2MjOc4+FnX2E3yzT BxQcY6kdQu23W//Myk11YNMnsAr3VSuGwmfFko/dZ5S6i3zHPKXcAbm0Ro2emUINiZm6Kb uxZ88KdFT5UKSVyEqnsR+XvAZFFosSunTBDTCbRUQJtt5ezEOF7ro59iPeXz8unjlJT2+a 4iREaVJLwWVmxStcArKjNesqg6PoHvlifCdy0QyK8ZZ78LMYCQwOi/LBQGFWhateG3O/sG tH++rAQnUckETTFLN1I2DjSEikU39Nu6lmljnvFqI3UA6umG/KGbgOmmWxmqaA== Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 927A19A05B for ; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:08:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tU3sH-00042r-BR; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:07:29 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tU3sF-00042a-FR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:07:27 -0500 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tU3sD-0008RM-62 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 08:07:27 -0500 Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF5EB240101 for ; Sat, 4 Jan 2025 14:07:21 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1735996041; bh=NidzuGeA/EVxpscpcPFvf1a3brBMXaGy0bprhGPi6Ys=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: From; b=SLVtP/r2maGEXnoOt9lKhHtv134rm9puem+acJDx8nAHwacuCGBQ+Uql6FM48AWw0 6vo0xe1cP9b8LOdM9gPBNKu+bMFw2W2T8JBwByTFZ4MCs10szPnFwYOg5iUsOX79Yw jt8XauA+asHRYdXm6bEKs9NkanVnYQ27M5AbW5C+1TX7I4AnThoMuoc4ZWAzzkKOqf Q9wNjLSf9isHKdztitbpvZAGrmRYVdYRGD27bPV4Alee9KTPRmKNltwWcACEXcz0lL jZHG21PcQI208PdEGp+evqZ41qfkeIL/8s6XhWe+1/3gSg3jlmECPVjz61+mXaBml/ /cxVt1nuMfrLA== Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4YQLMF1NRrz9rxD; Sat, 4 Jan 2025 14:07:21 +0100 (CET) From: Ihor Radchenko To: Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez Cc: Org Mode List Subject: Re: [PATCH]: ox-latex.eel: handle unnumbered sections in TOC correctly In-Reply-To: References: <495AE5B0-0551-40EC-B501-B681E479D261@gmail.com> <87wmfl3ttn.fsf@localhost> <87r05t3szf.fsf@localhost> <87v7v12juz.fsf@localhost> <87ikqyfxvm.fsf@localhost> <871pxlrvh9.fsf@localhost> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 13:09:33 +0000 Message-ID: <87ikqug1yq.fsf@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -8.96 X-Spam-Score: -8.96 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 927A19A05B X-Migadu-Scanner: mx10.migadu.com X-TUID: SwqUBUD96wCi Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez writes: > yes, the patch is just a step towards consistency, but I think is is an > important one, because it > makes org-mode not generate illegal/faulty LaTeX code. Right, but it is also kind of half-way between "Org export default" and "LaTeX" behaviors. If it is expected in LaTeX that unnumbered sections do not go into TOC, why should ALT_TITLE make them go there? Is it something expected for LaTeX users? > As for the photo-finish, I have been thinking the following that we can use > the 'toc' document property. > > Values nil and t work as intended in all backends. This means rewriting > this part in ox-latex.el. > Additionally, we add a new value 'toc:latex' to keep the current behaviour > in ox-latex (at least, other backends could also implement it). > Coming from the LaTeX world, I lean towards the current ToC handling in > ox-latex.el (once fixed). It is closer to what I have been doing for the > last couple of decades ;-) Depending on the answer to my question above, we may or may not be able to apply your existing patch right away. I do not yet have a clear picture what toc:latex should look like -- never put unnumbered headings into TOC? Only put them when there is ALT_TITLE? -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at