Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > Robert Klein <rokl...@roklein.de> writes: > >> this patch also breaks this kind of construct where not the table is >> exported, but the one created from the booktabs() call: >> >> >> ---> begin example <--- >> * Grundlagen >> *** COMMENT unexported subtree with table source >> #+tblname: masse > > This is deprecated. Use #+name: instead. > >> | 1 gestr. Teelffel | 1 gestr. Elffel | 1 Tasse | >> | ca. 5 ccm | ca 15 ccm | ca 120 ccm | >> |---------------------+-----------------------+-------------| >> | Zimt 2 g | Haferflocken 8 g | Mehl 80 g | >> | Paprika 2 g | Speisestärke 9 g | Grieß 96 g | >> | Speisestärke 2--3 g | Mehl, Semmelmehl 10 g | Zucker 90 g | >> | Zucker 4 g | Salz, Zucker, Öl 15 g | | >> | Salz 5 g | Reis, Butter 15 g | | >> >> ** Maße und Gewichte >> >> #+call: booktabs(table=masse, align="lll") :results latex :exports results >> ---> end example <--- > > Good catch. The line between data that can be accessed and data that > cannot in a commented subtree is blurry.
Can't we say that a COMMENT'ed subtree is like having all of its contents commented, line by line? IOW, nothing "accessible"? Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
