Hi, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> writes:
> My point is not about removing anything related to LaTeX syntax. I'm > fine with a \cite{...} (although I think [[cite:...]] may be cleaner) as > long as it really is accepted by most major export back-ends. > > But I think accepting raw commands like \vspace, \hfill and al. is not > necessary (as long as there's still a way to send them to the export > back-end). We shouldn't trick users into thinking these commands will be > obeyed in any situation. The contrast between \cite{...} and \hfill is interesting: the former has an intuitive meaning in non-LaTeX backends too, so I agree [[cite:...]] would be better here, but \hfill is a pure LaTeXism (as are inline $...$ formulas for example.) If we had a general syntax like [[cite:...]], then allowing the \cite{...} latexism would be convenient but redundant, and we could safely advise against using it. But pure latexisms like \hfill have no intuitive equivalent in other backends, and there is no ambiguity on what the user expects when he uses this -- so accepting them is convenient. Forcing #+LATEX: before these constructs would slow down editing the buffer. So here is the Occam's razor I suggest: let's generalize as much as possible, and let's handle as much latexisms as possible. -- Bastien