Re: [O] New exporter and dates in tables

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> writes:

> On 8 apr. 2013, at 13:27, Bernt Hansen <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> Bernt Hansen <address@hidden> writes:
>>> 
>>>> I have subtrees with inactive timestamps in the text indicating when
>>>> something occurred.  I normally don't want to export these.  But I think
>>>> any table data that includes inactive timestamps should be an exception
>>>> to this ... otherwise you get output tables with blank cells where the
>>>> meaningful timestamp data would be.
>>> 
>>> I understand.
>>> 
>>> So what exactly should be this exception? Should export ignore <:nil
>>> option in a whole table, or only when a table cell contains a single
>>> timestamp? IOW, how would it behaves in the following table:
>>> 
>>>  | [2013-04-04 Thu] | Lunch at [2013-04-04 Thu] ] |
>>> 
>>> when `org-export-with-timestamps' is either nil or `active'?
>> 
>> I think keeping it simple is best.  If there is an inactive timestamp in
>> a table then it should be exported (I consider everything in a table as
>> data).
>
>
> I think this is the right way to look at this.

I still find it surprising that <:nil will remove the timestamp in:

  Lunch at [2013-04-04 Thu]

but not in

  | Lunch at [2013-04-04 Thu] |

I suppose I'll eventually get it.

Anyway, there's still another thing to ponder. Since everything in
a table is data, what happens with "tex:nil" (LaTeX snippets)? Should
this option also be ignored within a table? If not, how can we explain
the difference with "<:nil"?


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou