Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
Hello, "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > For my information (and not only for me, I guess), is there a fundamental > reason (I guess yes) why width is a first-class parameter for tables and an > option among others for images? > > Looking from a 50 ft perspective, I would even imagine the opposite: images > will have to be scales in almost all cases (that is: have their image > attribute set), while tables will often take the space they need to. > > Is there a reason why images can't have their own attributes as well? I would > find that much, much more easy to apply, if we don't have to write the same > "functional" request in two different manners, depending on the > context. It's LaTeX's fault! In tables, width is an argument between curly brackets. In other words, it has a specific location among the command arguments. On the other hand, in images, width is just an option between square brackets. And the same brackets can contain other options. So, the easiest implementation was to follow LaTeX's conventions. An argument within curly brackets gets its own keyword. Optional arguments are stuffed within an `:options' keyword. With care[fn:1], "width" option could be extracted from `:options' keyword and get its own `:width' keyword. Do you want to give it a try? Regards, [fn:1] By deciding what to do when width is specified in both :options and :width keyword, for example. -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > >>> This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be: >>> >>> #+attr_latex: :width "5cm" >>> >>> or >>> >>> #+attr_latex: :width 5cm >> >> From the tests I made on images, with the Beamer back-end, those did not >> work. >> It had to be: >> >> #+ATTR_LaTeX: :options "width=5cm" >> >> Right? > > Correct. :width is for tables. Thanks. For my information (and not only for me, I guess), is there a fundamental reason (I guess yes) why width is a first-class parameter for tables and an option among others for images? Looking from a 50 ft perspective, I would even imagine the opposite: images will have to be scales in almost all cases (that is: have their image attribute set), while tables will often take the space they need to. Is there a reason why images can't have their own attributes as well? I would find that much, much more easy to apply, if we don't have to write the same "functional" request in two different manners, depending on the context. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
"Sebastien Vauban" writes: >> This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be: >> >> #+attr_latex: :width "5cm" >> >> or >> >> #+attr_latex: :width 5cm > > From the tests I made on images, with the Beamer back-end, those did not work. > It had to be: > > #+ATTR_LaTeX: :options "width=5cm" > > Right? Correct. :width is for tables. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > John Hendy writes: >> >> For what it's worth, these two behave identically: >> >> #+attr_latex: width=5cm >> #+attr_latex: width = 5cm >> >> I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently. > > This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be: > > #+attr_latex: :width "5cm" > > or > > #+attr_latex: :width 5cm >From the tests I made on images, with the Beamer back-end, those did not work. It had to be: #+ATTR_LaTeX: :options "width=5cm" Right? Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> John Hendy writes:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> John Hendy writes:
>>>
Was not getting the results I expected from #+attr_latex, so I created
a simplified table to test:
#+begin_src org
Centered (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{cc}=:
#+attr_latex: align=cc
| test | test |
| test of longer | test |
Left aligned (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{ll}=:
#+attr_latex: align = cc
| test | test |
| test of longer | test |
#+end_src
If there's reason for this, I can change my habits. I guess from
various tidy programming habits, I'm just in the practice of
separating equal signs with surrounding white space for easier
readability. For what it's worth, these two behave identically:
#+attr_latex: width=5cm
#+attr_latex: width = 5cm
I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently.
>>>
>>> This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be:
>>>
>>> #+attr_latex: :width "5cm"
>>>
>>> or
>>>
>>> #+attr_latex: :width 5cm
>>>
>>> The same goes for :align. Also, for simple alignment strings, you can
>>> provide align cookies within the table.
>>
>> Ah. Very good to know. Is this documented?
>
> It was only announced on this ML.
>
>> This is the syntax I use for babel blocks, but I've never seen it for
>> #+attr_latex. The manual also doesn't show any =:option "value"=
>> methods, at least in my initial peruse:
>> - http://orgmode.org/manual/Tables-in-LaTeX-export.html
>> -
>> http://orgmode.org/manual/Images-in-LaTeX-export.html#Images-in-LaTeX-export
>>
>> It's all in `option=value` format.
>>
>> Is your syntax (including the comment about cookies, as I haven't seen
>> that in the org manual either) relevant for the old exporter, or only
>> the new one? As I said, this is using the old exporter and I haven't
>> migrated over yet...
>
> The Babel-like syntax is only relevant for the new exporter.
>
> The old exporter had some support for align cookies in table (depending
> on the back-end).
>
Good to know. I guess this gives me reason to switch over!
John
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
John Hendy writes:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> John Hendy writes:
>>
>>> Was not getting the results I expected from #+attr_latex, so I created
>>> a simplified table to test:
>>>
>>> #+begin_src org
>>>
>>> Centered (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{cc}=:
>>>
>>> #+attr_latex: align=cc
>>> | test | test |
>>> | test of longer | test |
>>>
>>> Left aligned (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{ll}=:
>>>
>>> #+attr_latex: align = cc
>>> | test | test |
>>> | test of longer | test |
>>>
>>> #+end_src
>>>
>>> If there's reason for this, I can change my habits. I guess from
>>> various tidy programming habits, I'm just in the practice of
>>> separating equal signs with surrounding white space for easier
>>> readability. For what it's worth, these two behave identically:
>>>
>>> #+attr_latex: width=5cm
>>> #+attr_latex: width = 5cm
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently.
>>
>> This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be:
>>
>> #+attr_latex: :width "5cm"
>>
>> or
>>
>> #+attr_latex: :width 5cm
>>
>> The same goes for :align. Also, for simple alignment strings, you can
>> provide align cookies within the table.
>
> Ah. Very good to know. Is this documented?
It was only announced on this ML.
> This is the syntax I use for babel blocks, but I've never seen it for
> #+attr_latex. The manual also doesn't show any =:option "value"=
> methods, at least in my initial peruse:
> - http://orgmode.org/manual/Tables-in-LaTeX-export.html
> - http://orgmode.org/manual/Images-in-LaTeX-export.html#Images-in-LaTeX-export
>
> It's all in `option=value` format.
>
> Is your syntax (including the comment about cookies, as I haven't seen
> that in the org manual either) relevant for the old exporter, or only
> the new one? As I said, this is using the old exporter and I haven't
> migrated over yet...
The Babel-like syntax is only relevant for the new exporter.
The old exporter had some support for align cookies in table (depending
on the back-end).
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> John Hendy writes:
>
>> Was not getting the results I expected from #+attr_latex, so I created
>> a simplified table to test:
>>
>> #+begin_src org
>>
>> Centered (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{cc}=:
>>
>> #+attr_latex: align=cc
>> | test | test |
>> | test of longer | test |
>>
>> Left aligned (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{ll}=:
>>
>> #+attr_latex: align = cc
>> | test | test |
>> | test of longer | test |
>>
>> #+end_src
>>
>> If there's reason for this, I can change my habits. I guess from
>> various tidy programming habits, I'm just in the practice of
>> separating equal signs with surrounding white space for easier
>> readability. For what it's worth, these two behave identically:
>>
>> #+attr_latex: width=5cm
>> #+attr_latex: width = 5cm
>>
>> I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently.
>
> This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be:
>
> #+attr_latex: :width "5cm"
>
> or
>
> #+attr_latex: :width 5cm
>
> The same goes for :align. Also, for simple alignment strings, you can
> provide align cookies within the table.
Ah. Very good to know. Is this documented? This is the syntax I use
for babel blocks, but I've never seen it for #+attr_latex. The manual
also doesn't show any =:option "value"= methods, at least in my
initial peruse:
- http://orgmode.org/manual/Tables-in-LaTeX-export.html
- http://orgmode.org/manual/Images-in-LaTeX-export.html#Images-in-LaTeX-export
It's all in `option=value` format.
Is your syntax (including the comment about cookies, as I haven't seen
that in the org manual either) relevant for the old exporter, or only
the new one? As I said, this is using the old exporter and I haven't
migrated over yet...
Thanks for the prompt response!
John
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
Hello,
John Hendy writes:
> Was not getting the results I expected from #+attr_latex, so I created
> a simplified table to test:
>
> #+begin_src org
>
> Centered (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{cc}=:
>
> #+attr_latex: align=cc
> | test | test |
> | test of longer | test |
>
> Left aligned (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{ll}=:
>
> #+attr_latex: align = cc
> | test | test |
> | test of longer | test |
>
> #+end_src
>
> If there's reason for this, I can change my habits. I guess from
> various tidy programming habits, I'm just in the practice of
> separating equal signs with surrounding white space for easier
> readability. For what it's worth, these two behave identically:
>
> #+attr_latex: width=5cm
> #+attr_latex: width = 5cm
>
> I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently.
This syntax is wrong anyway. It should be:
#+attr_latex: :width "5cm"
or
#+attr_latex: :width 5cm
The same goes for :align. Also, for simple alignment strings, you can
provide align cookies within the table.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
[O] Align argument in #+attr_latex for tabular env. is whitespace sensitive
Was not getting the results I expected from #+attr_latex, so I created
a simplified table to test:
#+begin_src org
Centered (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{cc}=:
#+attr_latex: align=cc
| test | test |
| test of longer | test |
Left aligned (will be sent to LaTeX as =\begin{tabular}{ll}=:
#+attr_latex: align = cc
| test | test |
| test of longer | test |
#+end_src
If there's reason for this, I can change my habits. I guess from
various tidy programming habits, I'm just in the practice of
separating equal signs with surrounding white space for easier
readability. For what it's worth, these two behave identically:
#+attr_latex: width=5cm
#+attr_latex: width = 5cm
I'm not sure why the tabular align argument is behaving differently.
Thanks for any feedback,
john
