Thanks, Juan!
Yours, Christian Juan Manuel Macías writes: > Hi Ihor and Christian, > > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >> Christian Moe <m...@christianmoe.com> writes: >> >>> Do I understand correctly that the main advantage of this approach (over >>> #+INCLUDE) is the ability to continuously update preview of the whole >>> book with latexmk -pvc even if you only re-export one chapter from >>> Org-mode? >> >> I am not sure why Juan did not use include. Include would not require >> LaTeX to re-compile unchanged files. See >> https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/246/when-should-i-use-input-vs-include >> >>> I couldn't find the :body-only publishing option in the docs ...? >> >> See [[info:org#The Export Dispatcher][org#The Export Dispatcher]] >> >> Best, >> Ihor >> > > Sorry for not explaining the \input part in more detail. I think the > essential part here is that all the .tex files (the subdocuments) are > already created by org-publish before I compile the master document. The > master document simply stores all the subdocuments: I use > \input{subdocument.tex} instead of the org #+INCLUDE directive (not the > LaTeX \include command). The master document calls ready-made TeX files, > not Org files. And it is independent of the whole org-publish process, > which is responsible for creating only the parts of the book. This > procedure, apart from being able to compile parts of the book in real > time with latexmk -pvc, allows me to have more control over these parts. > But it makes more sense to use it when dealing with very long books. The > first time I used it was in a book of more than 1000 pages :-) > > The skeleton of the process is that subdocuments are produced with > org-publish (as uncompiled tex files) and the master document is > exported to tex from org and then compiled with latexmk inside /tex > directory. > > Best regards, > > Juan Manuel
