Bastien writes:
> Hi Tom,
>
> t...@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>
>> I think I understand. Would it suffice to add this disclaimer to the
>> documentation for starters?
>>
>> "Features used in ways not explicitly documented here cannot be
>> guaranteed future support."
>
> This is stating t
Hi Tom,
t...@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
> I think I understand. Would it suffice to add this disclaimer to the
> documentation for starters?
>
> "Features used in ways not explicitly documented here cannot be
> guaranteed future support."
This is stating the obvious, and this gives a fee
Hi András,
András Major writes:
> To me, the documentation is the leading specification of a piece of
> software. Anything the software doesn't do that is in the docs is a
> bug,
Yes, a *major documentation bug*.
> but likewise anything it does do which the docs don't cover is
> also a bug.
Hi András,
András Major writes:
> I fully agree with you, but it looks like I didn't express my point
> clearly enough.
Thanks for taking the time to make this clear.
> if the tag :noexport: is only supposed
> to work in headlines, then I consider it a bug if it works elsewhere,
> so the dev
Eric Schulte gmail.com> writes:
> Are you /sure/ that this doesn't work for you? On my system C-c C-e A
> in the following attached org-mode file (posted earlier in this thread)
I've just pulled the code again, now it seems to work. I'm not sure
what went wrong last night (release_7.7.174.g63f
András Major writes:
> Hi Tom,
>
>> > To me, the documentation is the leading specification of a piece of
>> > software. Anything the software doesn't do that is in the docs is a
>> > bug, but likewise anything it does do which the docs don't cover is
>> > also a bug.
>>
>> Aloha Andras,
>>
>>
Hi Tom,
> > To me, the documentation is the leading specification of a piece of
> > software. Anything the software doesn't do that is in the docs is a
> > bug, but likewise anything it does do which the docs don't cover is
> > also a bug.
>
> Aloha Andras,
>
> As an avocational programmer who
Eric Schulte writes:
> Nick Dokos writes:
>
>> András Major wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> > > Your file uses #+data: where I use #+tblname: -- which one is the
>>> > > official one? I have the impression that it's #+data:, but I haven't
>>> > > come across that in the manual or elsewhere bef
Nick Dokos writes:
> András Major wrote:
>
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> > > Your file uses #+data: where I use #+tblname: -- which one is the
>> > > official one? I have the impression that it's #+data:, but I haven't
>> > > come across that in the manual or elsewhere before. If #+tblname:
>> > > isn't
András Major writes:
> Hi Bastien,
>
>> > I think that anything that works despite being designed and documented
>> > otherwise is confusing to the user and should be considered a bug.
>> > I'm happy that it no longer works and hope that it stays that way.
>>
>> I think tags are clearly document
András Major wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> > > Your file uses #+data: where I use #+tblname: -- which one is the
> > > official one? I have the impression that it's #+data:, but I haven't
> > > come across that in the manual or elsewhere before. If #+tblname:
> > > isn't supposed to be used as a targe
Hi Eric,
> > Your file uses #+data: where I use #+tblname: -- which one is the
> > official one? I have the impression that it's #+data:, but I haven't
> > come across that in the manual or elsewhere before. If #+tblname:
> > isn't supposed to be used as a target for a variable in the code
> > b
Hi Bastien,
> > I think that anything that works despite being designed and documented
> > otherwise is confusing to the user and should be considered a bug.
> > I'm happy that it no longer works and hope that it stays that way.
>
> I think tags are clearly documented as being properties of the
>
Hi Bastien,
> I'm not sure I understand -- does it mean that C-cC-c on #+begin_src
> fails in the example below?
No, it means that exporting to HTML fails with that error message. It
should actually evaluate the code and include the resulting PNG in the
output (and that's what it does when :noe
>
> Your file uses #+data: where I use #+tblname: -- which one is the
> official one? I have the impression that it's #+data:, but I haven't
> come across that in the manual or elsewhere before. If #+tblname:
> isn't supposed to be used as a target for a variable in the code
> block, then we shou
Hi András,
András Major writes:
> I think that anything that works despite being designed and documented
> otherwise is confusing to the user and should be considered a bug.
> I'm happy that it no longer works and hope that it stays that way.
I think tags are clearly documented as being propert
Hi Eric,
Eric Schulte writes:
> I'm not sure that it is legal to apply tags to tables, so I'm not sure
> if this is a bug.
I confirm tags are for headlines only.
If we want to add more export options to tables, let's use the usual
"#+[option] syntax -- like #+caption does.
--
Bastien
Hi András,
András Major writes:
>> I'd have expected the noexport tag to be on a section containing the table.
>
> I forgot to mention in the report that of course I tried that too: if
> I place the table and the code in two sections and tag the section
> containing the table with :noexport:, th
Hi András,
András Major writes:
> here is an example that delivers an error "reference 'table1' not
> found in this buffer" when trying to export to HTML (others not tried
> yet):
>
> #+tblname: table1 :noexport:
> | n | x | y1 | y2 |
> |---+---+-+--|
> | 0 | 1 | 2.0 |
Hi Eric,
> > That's good news! Well, the bad news is that it doesn't work. I've
> > just pulled the current version (release_7.7.174.g63fae) and now the
> > behaviour is different:
> >
> > - :noexport: in the #+tblname: has no effect.
>
> I'm not sure that it is legal to apply tags to tables, s
András Major writes:
> Hi Eric,
>
>> This is the first time I've seen a tag applied to a table. I've updated
>> the results regular expression so that it will now admit examples like
>> yours above. Please let me know if this doesn't work with the latest
>> Org-mode.
>
> That's good news! Well
Hi Eric,
> This is the first time I've seen a tag applied to a table. I've updated
> the results regular expression so that it will now admit examples like
> yours above. Please let me know if this doesn't work with the latest
> Org-mode.
That's good news! Well, the bad news is that it doesn't
András Major writes:
> Hi,
>
> here is an example that delivers an error "reference 'table1' not
> found in this buffer" when trying to export to HTML (others not tried
> yet):
>
> #+tblname: table1 :noexport:
> | n | x | y1 | y2 |
> |---+---+-+--|
> | 0 | 1 | 2.0 | 3.0
Hi Sebastian,
> I will let answer the ones who decide on such things. Though, I am amazed you
> put a tag on the table itself.
>
> I'd have expected the noexport tag to be on a section containing the table.
I forgot to mention in the report that of course I tried that too: if
I place the table a
Hi András & al.,
András Major wrote:
> here is an example that delivers an error "reference 'table1' not
> found in this buffer" when trying to export to HTML (others not tried
> yet):
>
> #+tblname: table1 :noexport:
> | n | x | y1 | y2 |
> |---+---+-+--|
> | 0 | 1 | 2.0
Hi,
here is an example that delivers an error "reference 'table1' not
found in this buffer" when trying to export to HTML (others not tried
yet):
#+tblname: table1 :noexport:
| n | x | y1 | y2 |
|---+---+-+--|
| 0 | 1 | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| 1 | 2 | 2.1 | 2.0 |
| 2 | 3 | 2.
26 matches
Mail list logo
