Re: XHTML export -   etc.

["Daniel Clemente" <n142857@gmail.com>]

I should add that the @<em>at-syntax@</em>:
-  is too HTML-specific (we need something that exports as good to
LaTeX as to HTML)
- and sometimes it isn't clear what to write. For instance if I want
to write [1] without being processed as a footnote (on a document with
footnotes on); something like @<span>[@</span>1@<span>]@</span> would
be too complex.


@<strong>@<em>Greetings@</em>@</strong> :-)
Daniel


2007/11/9, Daniel Clemente <n142857@gmail.com>:
> >
> > >  - you write C-x 8 SPC in your org files
> > >  - C-x 8 SPC is exported to &nbsp; on HTML
> > >  - C-x 8 SPC is exported to ~ on HTML
> > >  - ~ continues working normally: produces ~ on HTML and \~{} on LaTeX
> >
> > 100% okay.  And you can add:
> >
> > - \~ will insert ~ in the LaTeX source
> >
>    Yes
>
> > >    Sometimes the \ means „don't escape", sometimes not.
> >
> > Are you okay with this:
> >
> >  Org  =>  LaTeX
> > ----------------
> >   \~  =>  ~
> >   \%  =>  %
> >   \#  =>  #
> >   \{  =>  {
> >   \}  =>  }
> >   \&  =>  &
> >   \_  =>  _
> >   \^  =>  ^
> >
> > (i.e. preventing special characters from being converted.)
>
>    Mmm... some of those characters /can/ already be written directly
> and they won't be interpreted, so you suggest adding a second method
> (ex: \# besides # ). Maybe some users find this confusing and prefer
> just one way to write each sign.
>    What do other people think? Should both # and \# write # ?
>
>    But your proposal would convert \ into the generic escaping character.
>    This is good since then you can always write \% (or with any
> character of the list) and you know it will be escaped.
>    But this is bad because this would only work on the characters you
> proposed, not on all. Ex \[ would probably write \[ and not [
>
>    I would suggest:
>  1.  Using \# just for signs that are part of org's syntax: _ ^
>  2.  Developing a general way to include a literal text without
> processing of org's syntax. For instance, the string *word* where both
> asterisks should be visible at the exported text (instead of a bold
> word). That can be implemented with start-end markers (ex:
> <literal>some *unprocessed* text</literal>) or with a marker before
> each sign: (ex: some \*unprocessed\* text).
>
>   1 and 2 can be combined if \# works with exactly all syntax
> elements, that means, all elements which would otherwise change the
> meaning and processing of the text. For instance:
> \*
> \/
> \[
> \]
> \#
> \|
> \=
> etc.
>   Of course, also \\ must be present to write a literal \
>   For the signs which are not part of org's syntax, you wouldn't need
> to write \  Ex: \( is unnecesary since ( has no meaning in org.
>
>
>    Sorry for starting anothed discussion :-)
>
>
> Daniel
>