emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[O] Re: [PATCH] Problem with html export of description list items


From: Ethan Ligon
Subject: [O] Re: [PATCH] Problem with html export of description list items
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:52:51 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)

Nic-

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > Ethan Ligon <ligon <at> are.berkeley.edu> writes:
> >> 
> >> I've just stumbled across what I regard as a bug in the html export of
> >> description list items.
> >> 
> >> The problem has to do with whether the specification of a description
> >> list includes a trailing space or not; i.e., whether "- Item ::" is
> >> treated the same way as "- Item :: ".  LaTeX export treats these as
> >> identical.  Html export gets confused about what the description list
> >> item is, and winds up generating a "???" for the description.
> 
> LaTeX exporter doesn't treats these as identical. What happens is that
> in your example, the first item is correct and the list is thus set as
> a description list. As such, LaTeX exporter tries hard to fill
> description terms for every item in the list. If you exchange the first
> and second items in your example, the list will be exported as
> a standard itemize list in LaTeX.

<snip>

> Your patch allows items like:
> 
> - term ::description
> 
> which are not valid for a description list.

Thanks for correcting my misunderstanding of the latex-export
behavior.  But I still think this behavior is undesirable.

The org manual says that a description item takes the form '- term
:: ', and thus seems to require a space after the double colon.  I
suppose it's this that you're relying on in claiming that 
"- term ::description" is invalid.

I agree that "- term ::description" is ugly, but the use-case that is
giving me problems is something like
  
  - term ::
    1. A list
    2. Providing
    3. The description

The html export code currently allows "- term ::[ \t]+", so the above
breaks unless there's a space or a tab following the "::".  My issue
would be addressed if we could just slightly expand the set of
allowable white space following, so that we'd have "::[ \t\n]+".

Does that seem reasonable?

Thanks,
-Ethan







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]