Re: [patch][org-entities] More symbols

[Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com>]

Hello,

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:

Thanks for the patch.

> This patch adds some general interest(?) symbols to org entities that
> otherwise lived in my init file.
>
> 1. I don't know how to easily check whether a glyph is supported by
>    Latin 1, so Latin 1 entries correspond to the ASCII equivalent.

Use "C-u C-x =" on the character and look at "preferred charset"
property.

> 2. HTML symbols have been tested in Firefox.  In a few cases I
>    couldn't find a pretty name (like "&pi;") in which case I've
>    supplied the unicode number (like "&960;").  Is that OK?  (E.g. can
>    Org produce non-uft8 HTML?)

I think it can: see `org-html-coding-system'. It may be wiser to avoid
these symbols altogether.

> 3. In LaTeX the symbols are mostly defined in amsmath, except coloneqq
>    and eqqcolon which requires something like mathtools or kpfonts or
>    possibly unicode-math.  Is that OK?

Any additional package needed must be added to
`org-latex-default-packages-alist', which means that the package will be
loaded in every LaTeX export. So, this is clearly not OK for packages
like "kpfonts".

As a rule of thumb, I think we should avoid requiring new packages for
org-entities.

> I also fixed some
>    inconsistencies.  E.g. loz was loaded diamond even though loz is
>    defined in amssymb and "~" and "\tilde" produced different results
>    (the latter produces the irritating "\~{}" often observed among
>    (social science?) university professors...).

Sounds good.

> +    ("varphi", "\\varphi" t "&varphi;" "varphi" "varphi" "ɸ ")

Why is there a space in UTF-8 code?

> +    ("preccurlyeq" "\\preccurlyeq" t "&prcue;" "[precedes or equal]" "[precedes or equal]" "≼")

This one is LaTeX specific, it may be more appropriate in
`org-entities-user'.

> +    ("succcurlyeq" "\\succeq" t "&sccue;" "[succeeds or equal]" "[succeeds or equal]" "≽")

Ditto. Also, the LaTeX code looks wrong.

> +    ("nexist" "\\exists" t "&exist;" "[there does not exists]" "[there does not  exists]" "∄")
> +    ("nexists" "\\exists" t "&exist;" "[there does not exists]" "[there does not  exists]" "∄")

Didn't you forget a "\not" in LaTeX entry?

>      ("lArr" "\\Leftarrow" t "&lArr;" "<=" "<=" "⇐")
>      ("Leftarrow" "\\Leftarrow" t "&lArr;" "<=" "<=" "⇐")
> +    ("impliedby" "\\impliedby"  t "&lArr;" "<=" "<=" "⇐")

Is is really needed? There are already two entities producing the same
code.

>      ("rArr" "\\Rightarrow" t "&rArr;" "=>" "=>" "⇒")
>      ("Rightarrow" "\\Rightarrow" t "&rArr;" "=>" "=>" "⇒")
> +    ("implies" "\\implies" t "&rArr;" "=>" "=>" "⇒")

Ditto.

>      ("Leftrightarrow" "\\Leftrightarrow" t "&hArr;" "<=>" "<=>" "⇔")
> +    ("iff" "\\iff" t "&hArr;" "<=>" "<=>" "⇔")

Ditto.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou