From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id WEUiDp0B42GhQQAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 18:17:17 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id KBT/Cp0B42HJHQAAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 18:17:17 +0100 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 886EC2E589 for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 18:17:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:42850 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8mfz-00049Y-6v for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 12:17:15 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41514) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8mf2-00049P-S6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 12:16:16 -0500 Received: from [2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c] (port=39817 helo=mail-pj1-x102c.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n8mez-0004Y6-Sy for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 12:16:16 -0500 Received: by mail-pj1-x102c.google.com with SMTP id c14-20020a17090a674e00b001b31e16749cso25291446pjm.4 for ; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 09:16:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version; bh=aPYIhKVWQ+/Z1zGSOwo4BHYn5OgcQWgGXkA7zRWwudQ=; b=lLZNKZxKe+cLBrRYqaBBE6BAu3AqMRDMyJrsK/sUsnMBh8Zvo+e5V7rfIhcCNbyEth vPlvwsMKMvvhlRNPky0iC2nGRnhyfrrr4DSMaRI2C6q6ppWm/0v6LxIWt8H7ky1JNpr3 XJczGgVqhOlOzbqbtDk5sMcwppjgmEoEtcgMM4JBBf7Eiasp5iDJir9p5dDyiqbX8CmE j3LKd+LYrfn7hkacfYTGzDJD9qVCirh3IhDSGeuWMFcqVnF63t8sA9K/exKERu5nwZYU iHtCQpw/ASF3nS756uLARbWR13I0F4uKi4Cxz3Fp4+Gyc4g58kOd2s8PjJCEXg82HleV zZsg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version; bh=aPYIhKVWQ+/Z1zGSOwo4BHYn5OgcQWgGXkA7zRWwudQ=; b=BL+JiduBRrklO2YMHyeOBkBQ4Pn4/7lMXLIz9bLbSt1aUj4pnQsF1xs05de0WnE4UQ r4dZVvTso17SWHKxc3PoZK2vUSXMoF0fteOrQ62ZDQq2YHFdgfSdR1YY33MQCCtONoP9 P72CIrweKQC+MZyIzGCZ7d9Hs4PW61VeKFt5H8S1NJmXzBg2Ei9L2gcsmA69ARUGvJXh j3VQUmVZ981SCwE5qtiHB4K4CG7mRyImDheJ5mlrn78Ek602k0RarIV6DGhVjYrqpb26 Y5cGiOrE0ZIsiVvI4vY/lhTrCv/mR2Q9N1hyHT1We/lGYaj6Q7KuBVew/kAByqYCeNbE KqPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531oEKZHX5nuNtIqulxGKffhpbDdRU71bUMytYJ9Eed1bZ6OnsAj Lo7ti70KnyYcCRNu8yRTYsU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwSX/dR0yBHy9MQPQhmI+X/7Fkb99V8vBhi67sInyyZv7NFJI6W6aiEAaC12CnRIQic2L4oWw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:9a43:b0:14a:4624:352b with SMTP id x3-20020a1709029a4300b0014a4624352bmr14920177plv.18.1642266971357; Sat, 15 Jan 2022 09:16:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (61-245-128-160.3df580.per.nbn.aussiebb.net. [61.245.128.160]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e11sm8177503pjh.14.2022.01.15.09.16.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 15 Jan 2022 09:16:11 -0800 (PST) From: Timothy To: sebastien.miquel@posteo.eu Subject: Re: Depreciating TeX-style LaTeX fragments (was: Org Syntax Specification) Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 00:36:35 +0800 References: <871r1g936z.fsf@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 28.0.90 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87lezgly20.fsf@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::102c; envelope-from=tecosaur@gmail.com; helo=mail-pj1-x102c.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, PDS_HP_HELO_NORDNS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no 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: , Cc: org-mode-email Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1642267036; 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=aPYIhKVWQ+/Z1zGSOwo4BHYn5OgcQWgGXkA7zRWwudQ=; b=C/iWgArlYrRR90MwhAerJq5/jbe3j/fji2U0MDN4x+T7ioyL8abbPg1xgZ1lC86kHLsevI wDArHt0pliBTntNa3oeVDbGsbKM4iYbB3jFTe7SdxB9yBECFr+qjtT+DW95V4wFS4BCmr+ hf/Cx7jWKRtX5fccqirbbH96EEPsVTJhcHAwgMHu+CaFuUKPnObcOvwF2A0fyAxk7njxPn Lt7lOfPqVHdVBYdFdw0COrPfKgISm3ihOXKvXeWt6h8HBAlEu1OfCdMJJHuQDXu3DOHaBm xHzwz8+Eay0dDR72nEOLsKO4sHHOWOjy6vmn1VzoE0BxnYOU9GEAxQV9JeeMWg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1642267036; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Hc7CKiFl/Q69FpN5JMf3l+9teEWYNRX2aLRdJQJk1Muq1vcQaN6gImOmdVuoLD7xWE3cl/ 3lkzt6e6ggPQLchgFKLZNm3G5BMsG8SNzqHFWNT+Au8iF+gxamLO9RBvxBp6p1NDC+KEZR PTFm7wSpbjRED3jmlGj+rR0mNwzmkTx2P29Dw5F2nwZ0hqDWk5u91+X2zir/qPS/AUArdR keeJDF5GRoGdL0kKU+WSEl6K/Yad3Y0rD327iozyS2w+3esNvL7fzPXsEJNuchz+TLERlm 0FEZlu2603ARx0qq+wvIObE6VIyhA0dd0PvcuxqF0CnkW9TVSKhkYdXzj/4Hbw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=lLZNKZxK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; 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" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.33 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=lLZNKZxK; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; 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" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 886EC2E589 X-Spam-Score: -3.33 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: rCKUKO777aO2 --=-=-= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="==-=-=" --==-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Sebastien, Thanks for your comments, and your thoughts on the proposed deprecation. It=E2=80=99s worth explicitly considering why we wouldn=E2=80=99t want to s= teer people away from the TeX-syntax LaTeX fragments, so I am glad you have brought up some reaso= ns. I do not find myself agreeing with them however, and will endeavour to expl= ain why below. =E2=81=83 It is easier to use =E2=80=A2 Hmm. Not sure about this. Keystroke wise we=E2=80=99re comparin= g `$$' to `\('. The latter can be completed by smartparens, but since single dollars are reasonable Org content the former can=E2=80=99t. At this point the only= argument is muscle memory, and if you=E2=80=99re a LaTeX user (a good target audien= ce for LaTeX fragments I think), I=E2=80=99d expect LaTeX-style `\(' to be more fami= liar. =E2=81=83 Easier to read =E2=80=A2 I had a quick look at a document to gauge this for myself, and = if anything I found the opposite (see ). This may be influen= ced by a minor fontification tweak I made to LaTeX style input though. =E2=81=83 more commonly used (and known) in tex documents (a quick web sear= ch for sample tex documents confirms the latter). =E2=81=83 Removing this syntax would make org slightly harder to pick up, w= ith respect to writing scientific documents. =E2=80=A2 With respect to writing scientific documents, I think we can re= asonably expect people to be familiar with `\(', particularly given the points I= raise below. These points seem to have a common thread in wanting to have Org be like La= TeX. I find this sensible, but I think this is a good opportunity to point out t= hat $/$$ are very much second class citizens in LaTeX now, no matter what you m= ay see in old documents. To quote from David Carlisle (one of the main members of the LaTeX3 team) o= n [tex.stackexchange]: > $$ is TeX primitive syntax, which, as others have commented is hard to > redefine (in classic TeX there is no command name which triggers entering= or > leaving display math). > LaTeX doesn=E2=80=99t officially support $$. The most noticeable failure = if you use > the syntax is that the fleqn option will no longer affect the display of = the > mathematics, it will remain centered rather than being set flush left. Another member of the LaTeX3 team, Joseph Wright, has made even stronger comments about $-syntax on [tex.stackexchange]: > I=E2=80=99d note with my =E2=80=99LaTeX3=E2=80=99 hat on that there is a = strong chance we=E2=80=99ll favour `\( > ... \)' to the point of not supporting `$...$' for LaTeX3. So in the long= term it > might be best to get used to `\(...\)'. In further comments Joseph goes on to say that it is likely that $-syntax w= ill /not/ be dropped outright, but that $$ likely will be. Among other things the $-syntax produces worse error reporting and spacing. So, to sum up LaTeX currently prefers `\(...\)' / `\[...\]' over `$' / `$$'= , and it looks like people will be pushed more strongly in this direction in future. More than anything else, I think this demonstrates why aside from annoyances with the parsing, purely from a user perspective, it would make sense to fa= vour LaTeX-syntax LaTeX fragments. All the best, Timothy [tex.stackexchange] [tex.stackexchange] --==-=-= Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Sebastien,

Thanks for your comments, and your thoughts on the proposed deprecation.

It=E2=80=99s worth explicitly considering why we wouldn=E2=80=99t want to s= teer people away from the TeX-syntax LaTeX fragments, so I am glad you have brought up some reaso= ns. I do not find myself agreeing with them however, and will endeavour to expl= ain why below.

  • It is easier to use
    • Hmm. Not sure about this. Keystroke= wise we=E2=80=99re comparing $$ = to \(. The latter can be completed by smartparens, but since single dollars are reasonable Org content the former can=E2=80=99t. At this point the only arg= ument is muscle memory, and if you=E2=80=99re a LaTeX user (a good target audience f= or LaTeX fragments I think), I=E2=80=99d expect LaTeX-style \( to be more familiar.
  • Easier to read
    • I had a quick look at a document to= gauge this for myself, and if anything I found the opposite (see 3D"o-32.png"/). This may be influenc= ed by a minor fontification tweak I made to LaTeX style input though.
  • more commonly used (and known) in tex documents (a quick web search for= sample tex documents confirms the latter).
  • Removing this syntax would make org slightly harder to pick up, with re= spect to writing scientific documents.
    • With respect to writing scientific = documents, I think we can reasonably expect people to be familiar with \(, particularly given the points I raise below.

These points seem to have a common thread in wanting to have Org be like La= TeX. I find this sensible, but I think this is a good opportunity to point out t= hat $/$$ are very much second class citizens in LaTeX now, no matter what you m= ay see in old documents.

To quote from David Carlisle (one of the main members of the LaTeX3 team) o= n tex.stackexchange:

$$ is TeX primitive syntax, which, as others have commented is hard to redefine (in classic TeX there is no command name which triggers entering or leaving display math). LaTeX doesn=E2=80=99t officially support $$. The most noticeable failure if= you use the syntax is that the fleqn option will no longer affect the display of the mathematics, it will remain centered rather than being set flush left.

Another member of the LaTeX3 team, Joseph Wright, has made even stronger comments about $-syntax on tex.stackexchange:

I=E2=80=99d note with my =E2=80=99LaTeX3=E2=80=99 hat on that there is a st= rong chance we=E2=80=99ll favour \( ... \) to the point of not supporting $...$ for LaTeX3. So in the long term it might be best to get used to \(...\).

In further comments Joseph goes on to say that it is likely that $-syntax w= ill not be dropped outright, but that $$ likely will be. Among other things the $-syntax produces worse error reporting and spacing.

So, to sum up LaTeX currently prefers \= (...\) / \[...\] over $ / More than anything else, I think this demonstrates why aside from annoyances with the parsing, purely from a user perspective, it would make sense to fa= vour LaTeX-syntax LaTeX fragments.

All the best,
Timothy

From: S=C3=A9bastien Miquel
Subject: Re: Org Syntax Specification
To: Timothy, org-mode-email<= br/> Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:40:12 +0800

Hi,

The new document seems much clearer. It makes a nice complement to the
manual and we should definitely lose the (draft). Thank you Timothy
for the work.

Lastly, having spent a while looking at the syntax, I=E2=80=99m wondering i= f we should take this opportunity to mark some of the syntactic elements we=E2=80=99ve become less happy with as (deprecia= ted). I=E2=80=99m specifically thinking of the TeX-style LaTeX fragments which have been a bit of a pain. To quote Nicolas in org-syntax.org:

It would introduce incompatibilities with previous Org versions, but support for $...$ (and for symmetry, $$...$$) constructs ought to be removed.

They are slow to parse, fragile, redundant and imply false positives. =E2=80=94 ngz


This quote has been mentioned a few times lately, and no one has yet
spoken in favor of the $=E2=80=A6$ syntax, so I'll have a quick go.

It is easier to use, easier to read and more commonly used (and known)
in tex documents (a quick web search for sample tex documents confirms
the latter). Removing this syntax would make org slightly harder to
pick up, with respect to writing scientific documents.
<= /p> As for the listed shortcomings, I don't think we know whether its
slowness is significant and false positives can be avoided by using
the \dollar entity (possibly ?). In my own use, the only usability issue I can think of is false negatives while writing : inserting a
space or other such characters at the end of a snippet removes the fontification (I solve this by modifying the fontification regexps).

Regards,

--=20
S=C3=A9bastien Miquel
--==-=-=-- --=-=-=--