From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Bug: text export and multi-word link descriptions with line breaks Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 22:54:01 +0200 Message-ID: <87ob0i8786.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20140403142834.GA27238@gmx.org> <87ha6a4er6.fsf@gmail.com> <20140403163024.GB27299@gmx.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33150) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WVodn-0006z1-JG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:53:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WVodi-0007bA-5a for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:53:39 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22d]:33086) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WVodh-0007b4-Uv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:53:34 -0400 Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w61so2452293wes.18 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 13:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from selenimh ([91.224.148.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fs16sm320721wic.18.2014.04.03.13.53.30 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Apr 2014 13:53:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140403163024.GB27299@gmx.org> (Mathias Bauer's message of "Thu, 3 Apr 2014 18:30:24 +0200") 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 Mathias Bauer writes: > I expect, Org to do the following steps while parsing the source > text: > > 1. "Normalize" or clean the link description, i.e. remove any > newlines, starting and trailing spaces, and replace any > occurrences of "[ \t]+" in the interior by a single space > only. (To be done.) > > 2. Check the tuple (description,target) for duplicates and drop > them. (Seems ok to me.) > > 3. Below the paragraph list the tuples as "[description] target" > in the order of occurrence in the original text. (Also seems > ok to me.) > > I hope this makes this issue a little bit more clear now. Indeed. I missed the duplicates links. This should be fixed. Thank you for the report. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou