List of figures

List of figures

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha all,

I'm trying to generate a list of figures for LaTeX export.  I thought to
use #+TOC: figures, but this didn't work.

The Org Export Reference Documentation has this:

  “TOC” keyword. It accepts three common values: “headlines”, “tables” and
  “listings”. Also, “headlines” value can have an optional numeric
  argument to specify depth of the contents.

  See org-export-collect-headlines, org-export-collect-tables,
  org-export-collect-figures and org-export-collect-listings.

Two questions:

1) Is there a reason that the TOC keyword doesn't accept the value
"figures"? The reference to org-export-collect-figures suggests that it
should accept this value.

2) Is there some other way to generate a list of figures for LaTeX
export?

All the best,
Tom
-- 
T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists
735 Bishop St, Suite 315, Honolulu, HI 96813
Tel: 808-529-0866, Fax: 808-529-0884
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: List of figures

[Rasmus]

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> 1) Is there a reason that the TOC keyword doesn't accept the value
> "figures"? The reference to org-export-collect-figures suggests that it
> should accept this value.

AFAIK it is not supported.  It has puzzled me as well.  It's trivial
to make a patch for ox-latex; the hard part is adding it to other
backends.

> 2) Is there some other way to generate a list of figures for LaTeX
> export?

There's the obvious one:

#+LATEX: \listoffigures

But that's probably not what you're looking for.

As you'll see from org-latex-keyword you can also "cheat" Org by
setting org-latex-listings to nil and use #+TOC: listings.

Hope it helps,
Rasmus

-- 
May contains speling mistake

Re: List of figures

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> I'm trying to generate a list of figures for LaTeX export.  I thought to
> use #+TOC: figures, but this didn't work.
>
> The Org Export Reference Documentation has this:
>
>   “TOC” keyword. It accepts three common values: “headlines”, “tables” and
>   “listings”. Also, “headlines” value can have an optional numeric
>   argument to specify depth of the contents.
>
>   See org-export-collect-headlines, org-export-collect-tables,
>   org-export-collect-figures and org-export-collect-listings.
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1) Is there a reason that the TOC keyword doesn't accept the value
> "figures"? The reference to org-export-collect-figures suggests that it
> should accept this value.

I had planned to allow "figures" for TOC, but I realized it was
difficult to define what a "figure" is outside of LaTeX.

There is the infrastructure, but it isn't used yet in back-ends.

> 2) Is there some other way to generate a list of figures for LaTeX
> export?

See Rasmus' answer.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

Re: List of figures

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Rasmus,

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:

> tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>
>> 1) Is there a reason that the TOC keyword doesn't accept the value
>> "figures"? The reference to org-export-collect-figures suggests that it
>> should accept this value.
>
> AFAIK it is not supported.  It has puzzled me as well.  It's trivial
> to make a patch for ox-latex; the hard part is adding it to other
> backends.
>
>> 2) Is there some other way to generate a list of figures for LaTeX
>> export?
>
> There's the obvious one:
>
> #+LATEX: \listoffigures
>
> But that's probably not what you're looking for.
>
> As you'll see from org-latex-keyword you can also "cheat" Org by
> setting org-latex-listings to nil and use #+TOC: listings.

Very helpful. Thanks!
-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: List of figures

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Hello,
>
> tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>
>> I'm trying to generate a list of figures for LaTeX export.  I thought to
>> use #+TOC: figures, but this didn't work.
>>
>> The Org Export Reference Documentation has this:
>>
>>   “TOC” keyword. It accepts three common values: “headlines”, “tables” and
>>   “listings”. Also, “headlines” value can have an optional numeric
>>   argument to specify depth of the contents.
>>
>>   See org-export-collect-headlines, org-export-collect-tables,
>>   org-export-collect-figures and org-export-collect-listings.
>>
>> Two questions:
>>
>> 1) Is there a reason that the TOC keyword doesn't accept the value
>> "figures"? The reference to org-export-collect-figures suggests that it
>> should accept this value.
>
> I had planned to allow "figures" for TOC, but I realized it was
> difficult to define what a "figure" is outside of LaTeX.
>
> There is the infrastructure, but it isn't used yet in back-ends.

I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.

Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense) and have other
back-ends insert a comment?

Not a big thing, obviously, but I was surprised when it didn't work.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: List of figures

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:

> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.

Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.

> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)

We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
trouble:

  #+toc: figures

vs.

  #+latex: \listoffigures

> and have other back-ends insert a comment?

Comments do not always make sense (e.g. ascii).


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

Re: List of figures

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Hello,
>
> tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>
>> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
>> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.
>
> Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>
>> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
>> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>
> We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
> back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
> trouble:
>
>   #+toc: figures
>
> vs.
>
>   #+latex: \listoffigures

AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly.  I'm confident that it will
let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.

My original query came about because I was trying to write Org markup
and *not* drop down to LaTeX.  In this context--Org as a lightweight
markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
"lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is missing a
piece. 

I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: List of figures

[John Kitchin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2294 bytes --]

Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures be?
Is it only for export?

I would make a link:  [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the buffer
and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures. You could
alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also specify how it
exports, eg.

[[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]

That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would also
happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize figures as
extensions in the file links.


John

-----------------------------------
John Kitchin
Associate Professor
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu



On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:

> Aloha Nicolas,
>
> Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> >
> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
> >> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.
> >
> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
> >
> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
> >
> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
> > trouble:
> >
> >   #+toc: figures
> >
> > vs.
> >
> >   #+latex: \listoffigures
>
> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly.  I'm confident that it will
> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>
> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org markup
> and *not* drop down to LaTeX.  In this context--Org as a lightweight
> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is missing a
> piece.
>
> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>
> All the best,
> Tom
>
> --
> Thomas S. Dye
> http://www.tsdye.com
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3220 bytes --]

Re: List of figures

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha John,

John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures be?
> Is it only for export?

Yes, it is.

> I would make a link:  [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the buffer
> and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures. You could
> alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also specify how it
> exports, eg.
>
> [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]

This is a neat idea. Thanks!

All the best,
Tom

>
> That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would also
> happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize figures as
> extensions in the file links.
>
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------
> John Kitchin
> Associate Professor
> Doherty Hall A207F
> Department of Chemical Engineering
> Carnegie Mellon University
> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> 412-268-7803
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
>
>> Aloha Nicolas,
>>
>> Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>> >
>> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
>> >> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.
>> >
>> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>> >
>> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
>> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>> >
>> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
>> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
>> > trouble:
>> >
>> >   #+toc: figures
>> >
>> > vs.
>> >
>> >   #+latex: \listoffigures
>>
>> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly.  I'm confident that it will
>> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>>
>> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org markup
>> and *not* drop down to LaTeX.  In this context--Org as a lightweight
>> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is missing a
>> piece.
>>
>> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
>> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Tom
>>
>> --
>> Thomas S. Dye
>> http://www.tsdye.com
>>
>>
> Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures
> be? Is it only for export?
>
> I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the
> buffer and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures.
> You could alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also
> specify how it exports, eg.
>
> [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>
> That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would
> also happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize
> figures as extensions in the file links.
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------
> John Kitchin
> Associate Professor
> Doherty Hall A207F
> Department of Chemical Engineering
> Carnegie Mellon University
> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> 412-268-7803
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
>
>     Aloha Nicolas,
>     
>     Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
>     
>     > Hello,
>     >
>     > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>     >
>     >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in
>     some
>     >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
>     unusual.
>     >
>     > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>     > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>     >
>     >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
>     export (and
>     >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>     >
>     > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for
>     major
>     > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth
>     the
>     > trouble:
>     >
>     > #+toc: figures
>     >
>     > vs.
>     >
>     > #+latex: \listoffigures
>     
>     AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
>     will
>     let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>     
>     My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
>     markup
>     and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
>     lightweight
>     markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>     "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
>     missing a
>     piece.
>     
>     I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
>     back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>     
>     All the best,
>     Tom
>     
>     --
>     Thomas S. Dye
>     http://www.tsdye.com
>     
>
>

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com

Re: List of figures

[Rasmus]

John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures be?
> Is it only for export?
>
> I would make a link:  [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the buffer
> and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures. You could
> alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also specify how it
> exports, eg.
>
> [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>
> That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would also
> happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize figures as
> extensions in the file links.

This is more like org-toc.el, though I'm not sure if it can be
configured to pick up figures.

Using org-element it should be at least be relatively easy to pick up
the structure of the document, though I think the reftex/org-toc way
of displaying such structure is superior to something tied to a
specific line in the buffer (I may want to jump to somewhere from the
bottom of my file).

—Rasmus

-- 
Got mashed potatoes. Ain't got no T-Bone. No T-Bone

Re: List of figures

[John Kitchin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5898 bytes --]

check out this implementation for tables:
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/blog/2014/03/01/Getting-a-list-of-tables-in-an-org-buffer/

John

-----------------------------------
John Kitchin
Associate Professor
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu



On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:

> Aloha John,
>
> John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
> > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures
> be?
> > Is it only for export?
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> > I would make a link:  [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the buffer
> > and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures. You could
> > alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also specify how it
> > exports, eg.
> >
> > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>
> This is a neat idea. Thanks!
>
> All the best,
> Tom
>
> >
> > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would
> also
> > happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize figures
> as
> > extensions in the file links.
> >
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----------------------------------
> > John Kitchin
> > Associate Professor
> > Doherty Hall A207F
> > Department of Chemical Engineering
> > Carnegie Mellon University
> > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> > 412-268-7803
> > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Aloha Nicolas,
> >>
> >> Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> >> >
> >> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
> >> >> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.
> >> >
> >> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> >> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
> >> >
> >> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export
> (and
> >> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
> >> >
> >> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
> >> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
> >> > trouble:
> >> >
> >> >   #+toc: figures
> >> >
> >> > vs.
> >> >
> >> >   #+latex: \listoffigures
> >>
> >> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly.  I'm confident that it will
> >> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
> >>
> >> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org markup
> >> and *not* drop down to LaTeX.  In this context--Org as a lightweight
> >> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
> >> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is missing a
> >> piece.
> >>
> >> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
> >> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thomas S. Dye
> >> http://www.tsdye.com
> >>
> >>
> > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures
> > be? Is it only for export?
> >
> > I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the
> > buffer and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures.
> > You could alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also
> > specify how it exports, eg.
> >
> > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
> >
> > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would
> > also happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize
> > figures as extensions in the file links.
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----------------------------------
> > John Kitchin
> > Associate Professor
> > Doherty Hall A207F
> > Department of Chemical Engineering
> > Carnegie Mellon University
> > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> > 412-268-7803
> > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
> >
> >     Aloha Nicolas,
> >
> >     Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >     > Hello,
> >     >
> >     > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> >     >
> >     >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in
> >     some
> >     >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
> >     unusual.
> >     >
> >     > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> >     > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
> >     >
> >     >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
> >     export (and
> >     >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
> >     >
> >     > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for
> >     major
> >     > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth
> >     the
> >     > trouble:
> >     >
> >     > #+toc: figures
> >     >
> >     > vs.
> >     >
> >     > #+latex: \listoffigures
> >
> >     AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
> >     will
> >     let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
> >
> >     My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
> >     markup
> >     and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
> >     lightweight
> >     markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
> >     "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
> >     missing a
> >     piece.
> >
> >     I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
> >     back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
> >
> >     All the best,
> >     Tom
> >
> >     --
> >     Thomas S. Dye
> >     http://www.tsdye.com
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Thomas S. Dye
> http://www.tsdye.com
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 8570 bytes --]

Re: List of figures

[Andreas Leha]

Hi John,

this is really nice!  Thanks for sharing.

- Andreas

John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

> check out this implementation for tables:
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/blog/2014/03/01/Getting-a-list-of-tables-in-an-org-buffer/
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------
> John Kitchin
> Associate Professor
> Doherty Hall A207F
> Department of Chemical Engineering
> Carnegie Mellon University
> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> 412-268-7803
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
>
>     Aloha John,
>     
>     
>     John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>     
>     > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc:
>     figures be?
>     > Is it only for export?
>     
>     
>     Yes, it is.
>     
>     
>     > I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
>     > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse
>     the buffer
>     > and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures.
>     You could
>     > alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also
>     specify how it
>     > exports, eg.
>     >
>     > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>     
>     
>     This is a neat idea. Thanks!
>     
>     All the best,
>     Tom
>     
>     
>     
>     >
>     > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it
>     would also
>     > happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize
>     figures as
>     > extensions in the file links.
>     >
>     >
>     > John
>     >
>     > -----------------------------------
>     > John Kitchin
>     > Associate Professor
>     > Doherty Hall A207F
>     > Department of Chemical Engineering
>     > Carnegie Mellon University
>     > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
>     > 412-268-7803
>     > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     >> Aloha Nicolas,
>     >>
>     >> Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
>     >>
>     >> > Hello,
>     >> >
>     >> > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>     >> >
>     >> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem
>     in some
>     >> >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
>     unusual.
>     >> >
>     >> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>     >> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>     >> >
>     >> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
>     export (and
>     >> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>     >> >
>     >> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be
>     for major
>     >> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not
>     worth the
>     >> > trouble:
>     >> >
>     >> > #+toc: figures
>     >> >
>     >> > vs.
>     >> >
>     >> > #+latex: \listoffigures
>     >>
>     >> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
>     will
>     >> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>     >>
>     >> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
>     markup
>     >> and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
>     lightweight
>     >> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>     >> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
>     missing a
>     >> piece.
>     >>
>     >> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the
>     major
>     >> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>     >>
>     >> All the best,
>     >> Tom
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> Thomas S. Dye
>     >> http://www.tsdye.com
>     >>
>     >>
>     > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc:
>     figures
>     > be? Is it only for export?
>     >
>     > I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
>     > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse
>     the
>     > buffer and present you with a list of clickable links to the
>     figures.
>     > You could alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could
>     also
>     > specify how it exports, eg.
>     >
>     > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>     >
>     > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it
>     would
>     > also happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would
>     recognize
>     > figures as extensions in the file links.
>     >
>     > John
>     >
>     > -----------------------------------
>     > John Kitchin
>     > Associate Professor
>     > Doherty Hall A207F
>     > Department of Chemical Engineering
>     > Carnegie Mellon University
>     > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
>     > 412-268-7803
>     > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>     >
>     > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com>
>     wrote:
>     >
>     > Aloha Nicolas,
>     >
>     > Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
>     >
>     > > Hello,
>     > >
>     > > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>     > >
>     > >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem
>     in
>     > some
>     > >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
>     > unusual.
>     > >
>     > > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>     > > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>     > >
>     > >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
>     > export (and
>     > >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>     > >
>     > > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be
>     for
>     > major
>     > > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not
>     worth
>     > the
>     > > trouble:
>     > >
>     > > #+toc: figures
>     > >
>     > > vs.
>     > >
>     > > #+latex: \listoffigures
>     >
>     > AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
>     > will
>     > let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>     >
>     > My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
>     > markup
>     > and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
>     > lightweight
>     > markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>     > "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
>     > missing a
>     > piece.
>     >
>     > I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the
>     major
>     > back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>     >
>     > All the best,
>     > Tom
>     >
>     > --
>     > Thomas S. Dye
>     > http://www.tsdye.com
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     
>     --
>     Thomas S. Dye
>     http://www.tsdye.com
>     

Re: List of figures

[John Kitchin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7655 bytes --]

No problem. I worked out a List of figures here:
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/blog/2014/03/02/Getting-a-list-of-figures-in-an-org-buffer/


John

-----------------------------------
John Kitchin
Associate Professor
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu



On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Andreas Leha <
andreas.leha@med.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> this is really nice!  Thanks for sharing.
>
> - Andreas
>
> John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
> > check out this implementation for tables:
> >
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/blog/2014/03/01/Getting-a-list-of-tables-in-an-org-buffer/
> >
> > John
> >
> > -----------------------------------
> > John Kitchin
> > Associate Professor
> > Doherty Hall A207F
> > Department of Chemical Engineering
> > Carnegie Mellon University
> > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> > 412-268-7803
> > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com> wrote:
> >
> >     Aloha John,
> >
> >
> >     John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> >
> >     > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc:
> >     figures be?
> >     > Is it only for export?
> >
> >
> >     Yes, it is.
> >
> >
> >     > I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> >     > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse
> >     the buffer
> >     > and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures.
> >     You could
> >     > alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also
> >     specify how it
> >     > exports, eg.
> >     >
> >     > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
> >
> >
> >     This is a neat idea. Thanks!
> >
> >     All the best,
> >     Tom
> >
> >
> >
> >     >
> >     > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it
> >     would also
> >     > happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize
> >     figures as
> >     > extensions in the file links.
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > John
> >     >
> >     > -----------------------------------
> >     > John Kitchin
> >     > Associate Professor
> >     > Doherty Hall A207F
> >     > Department of Chemical Engineering
> >     > Carnegie Mellon University
> >     > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> >     > 412-268-7803
> >     > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >     > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com>
> >     wrote:
> >     >
> >     >> Aloha Nicolas,
> >     >>
> >     >> Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
> >     >>
> >     >> > Hello,
> >     >> >
> >     >> > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> >     >> >
> >     >> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem
> >     in some
> >     >> >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
> >     unusual.
> >     >> >
> >     >> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> >     >> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
> >     >> >
> >     >> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
> >     export (and
> >     >> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
> >     >> >
> >     >> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be
> >     for major
> >     >> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not
> >     worth the
> >     >> > trouble:
> >     >> >
> >     >> > #+toc: figures
> >     >> >
> >     >> > vs.
> >     >> >
> >     >> > #+latex: \listoffigures
> >     >>
> >     >> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
> >     will
> >     >> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
> >     >>
> >     >> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
> >     markup
> >     >> and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
> >     lightweight
> >     >> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
> >     >> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
> >     missing a
> >     >> piece.
> >     >>
> >     >> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the
> >     major
> >     >> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
> >     >>
> >     >> All the best,
> >     >> Tom
> >     >>
> >     >> --
> >     >> Thomas S. Dye
> >     >> http://www.tsdye.com
> >     >>
> >     >>
> >     > Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc:
> >     figures
> >     > be? Is it only for export?
> >     >
> >     > I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> >     > org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse
> >     the
> >     > buffer and present you with a list of clickable links to the
> >     figures.
> >     > You could alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could
> >     also
> >     > specify how it exports, eg.
> >     >
> >     > [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
> >     >
> >     > That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it
> >     would
> >     > also happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would
> >     recognize
> >     > figures as extensions in the file links.
> >     >
> >     > John
> >     >
> >     > -----------------------------------
> >     > John Kitchin
> >     > Associate Professor
> >     > Doherty Hall A207F
> >     > Department of Chemical Engineering
> >     > Carnegie Mellon University
> >     > Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> >     > 412-268-7803
> >     > http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
> >     >
> >     > On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.com>
> >     wrote:
> >     >
> >     > Aloha Nicolas,
> >     >
> >     > Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:
> >     >
> >     > > Hello,
> >     > >
> >     > > tsd@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> >     > >
> >     > >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem
> >     in
> >     > some
> >     > >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
> >     > unusual.
> >     > >
> >     > > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
> >     > > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
> >     > >
> >     > >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
> >     > export (and
> >     > >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
> >     > >
> >     > > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be
> >     for
> >     > major
> >     > > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not
> >     worth
> >     > the
> >     > > trouble:
> >     > >
> >     > > #+toc: figures
> >     > >
> >     > > vs.
> >     > >
> >     > > #+latex: \listoffigures
> >     >
> >     > AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
> >     > will
> >     > let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
> >     >
> >     > My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
> >     > markup
> >     > and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
> >     > lightweight
> >     > markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
> >     > "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
> >     > missing a
> >     > piece.
> >     >
> >     > I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the
> >     major
> >     > back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
> >     >
> >     > All the best,
> >     > Tom
> >     >
> >     > --
> >     > Thomas S. Dye
> >     > http://www.tsdye.com
> >     >
> >     >
> >     >
> >
> >     --
> >     Thomas S. Dye
> >     http://www.tsdye.com
> >
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 11590 bytes --]