On 10/07/2022 03:22, Juan Manuel Macías wrote:
LuaTeX and XeTeX are
digital typesetting systems. They are not word processors.
I have skimmed through the discussion happened exactly a year ago
https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/scuirf$m7o$1...@ciao.gmane.io/
and I should repeat that you are too
Tim Cross writes:
>> By "updated" I meant downloaded from orgmode.org
>>
>
> OK, that would probably work. We would need to have some sort of
> version tracking so that the template function can know when there is a
> new template available - probably doable with either a comment in the
>
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Tim Cross writes:
>
>>> The template can be automatically updated by the command, possibly after
>>> asking user.
>>>
>>
>> Not sure I understand. Maybe we are imagining different things?
>>
>> If org has a template to assist in creating an org file suitable for
>>
Tim Cross writes:
>> The template can be automatically updated by the command, possibly after
>> asking user.
>>
>
> Not sure I understand. Maybe we are imagining different things?
>
> If org has a template to assist in creating an org file suitable for
> worg and then we need to update that
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Tim Cross writes:
>
>> Only drawback I can see is that should we want to change the template,
>> we would have to wait until a new version is released and then you will
>> still have a mix of templates as lots of people will wait until next
>> Emacs version etc.
>
>
Tim Cross writes:
> Only drawback I can see is that should we want to change the template,
> we would have to wait until a new version is released and then you will
> still have a mix of templates as lots of people will wait until next
> Emacs version etc.
The template can be automatically
Tim Cross writes:
> Thanks Juan. It will be fairly trivial to compile the information you
> have provided into a basic org document which I can then add to org. If
> on the other hand you would prefer to write it up, all I need is an org
> document which is based on the (current) org 'worg'
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Tim Cross writes:
>
>> Juan Manuel Macías writes:
>>
>> Thanks Juan. It will be fairly trivial to compile the information you
>> have provided into a basic org document which I can then add to org. If
>> on the other hand you would prefer to write it up, all I need
Tim Cross writes:
> Juan Manuel Macías writes:
>
> Thanks Juan. It will be fairly trivial to compile the information you
> have provided into a basic org document which I can then add to org. If
> on the other hand you would prefer to write it up, all I need is an org
> document which is based
I'm sorry, again, replying to the private copy of the message sent as
Cc, I dropped mail list address at first.
Please, consider my response in the following context:
https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87a69j9c6s.fsf@localhost/
Ihor Radchenko, 2022-07-09:
Or we may go even further and make
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
> Hi, Tim, thank you for your comments,
>
> Tim Cross writes:
>
>> Juan, I think it would be great to add your post to worg. I'm happy to
>> do this, but I think it wold also be good if we could include a basic
>> 'setup' i.e. what changes people might need to (or
Max Nikulin writes:
> Characters from Latin scripts, the set is wider than latin-1 but does
> not cover other languages. I do not dispute that font encoding is
> Unicode (if it can be stated so), usually support of Unicode is
> associated with smooth experience with wide range of languages.
A
Max Nikulin writes:
> LuaTeX uses Latin Modern
> and it is not nearly Unicode
Maxim, please look at this screenshots carefully:
https://i.imgur.com/uMfheCL.png
https://i.imgur.com/WwGybBA.png
https://i.imgur.com/hpreFNQ.png
Frankly, I don't know what Latin Modern you're referring to, and
On 09/07/2022 17:42, Juan Manuel Macías wrote:
Max Nikulin writes:
[...] With LuaTeX you get more convenient OTF and TTF font selection, but
you you have to pay for the feature. It is necessary to explicitly
specify all families: normal, typewriter, italics, etc if you need
Unicode. -
Not
Hi Thomas,
Thomas S. Dye writes:
> Yes, what I called Babel you call org-babel. I don't know if the Lua
> handler of source blocks in Org might be useful for someone interested
> to write Lua extensions to LaTeX.
I'm writing a package for LuaLaTeX in Org[1] using lua code blocks, and
Hi, Maxim,
Max Nikulin writes:
> [...] With LuaTeX you get more convenient OTF and TTF font selection, but
> you you have to pay for the feature. It is necessary to explicitly
> specify all families: normal, typewriter, italics, etc if you need
> Unicode. -
Not necessarily. You can go from the
Hi, Tim, thank you for your comments,
Tim Cross writes:
> Juan, I think it would be great to add your post to worg. I'm happy to
> do this, but I think it wold also be good if we could include a basic
> 'setup' i.e. what changes people might need to (or should do to maximise
> benefit) in order
On 09/07/2022 10:50, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
Or we may go even further and make org-latex-compiler default to luatex.
This will benefit all the non-latin language users.
1. It is necessary to detect if LuaLaTeX is installed to fallback to
PdfLaTeX otherwise. On Ubuntu presence of lualatex
FWIW: I have switched to lualatex years ago. In my opinion the additional
compilation time is worth much more than my time debugging problems with
weird symbols. Even when I only use Latin in the main text, most of the
time, there are some special symbols that would need special attention in
the
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> Tim Cross writes:
>
>> Juan, I think it would be great to add your post to worg. I'm happy to
>> do this, but I think it wold also be good if we could include a basic
>> 'setup' i.e. what changes people might need to (or should do to maximise
>> benefit) in order to
Tim Cross writes:
> Juan, I think it would be great to add your post to worg. I'm happy to
> do this, but I think it wold also be good if we could include a basic
> 'setup' i.e. what changes people might need to (or should do to maximise
> benefit) in order to try out luatex. For example, what
Max Nikulin writes:
> On 09/07/2022 01:49, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
>> Juan Manuel Macías writes:
>>
>>> TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
>>> using pdfTeX
>> I forgot to ask earlier. Is Lua support in Babel potentially useful? The
>> current
>>
Max Nikulin writes:
On 09/07/2022 01:49, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more
advantageous than
using pdfTeX
I forgot to ask earlier. Is Lua support in Babel potentially
useful?
The current implementation doesn't work
On 09/07/2022 01:49, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
using pdfTeX
I forgot to ask earlier. Is Lua support in Babel potentially useful?
The current implementation doesn't work too well.
In the context
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
> TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
> using pdfTeX
>
>
>
> Many times Org users who frequently need to export their documents to
> LaTeX, but who do not have much LaTeX experience (or their knowledge of
> the TeX
Bruce D'Arcus writes:
> Today, I think the only advantage pdftex has is speed; it's a lot
> faster to compile documents than luatex.
That's true, but it seems to be a LaTeX and fontspec issue. I think
ConTeXt, which uses LuaTeX, is faster, but I don't have the hard data.
In general TeX is slow
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more
advantageous than
using pdfTeX
I forgot to ask earlier. Is Lua support in Babel potentially
useful? The current implementation doesn't work too well.
All the best,
Tom
--
Thomas S. Dye
Today, I think the only advantage pdftex has is speed; it's a lot
faster to compile documents than luatex.
And maybe some advanced microtypography features, though I haven't tracked that.
Bruce
Juan Manuel, et al.,
> TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
> using pdfTeX
i'm guessing this would be a nice addtion to worg (if it's not already
there).
cheers, Greg
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more
advantageous than
using pdfTeX
Interesting. Thanks!
All the best,
Tom
--
Thomas S. Dye
https://tsdye.online/tsdye
Hi Uwe,
Uwe Brauer writes:
> Thanks for that list.
>
> Well I have felt in the past the same about pdftex, but I have partially
> switched to xetex precisely on the reasons you list.
>
> I have not have the time, to really try out Luatex. Did you have the
> time to compare it with XeTeX?
First
>>> "JMM" == Juan Manuel Macías writes:
Hi Juan
> TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
> using pdfTeX
>
> Many times Org users who frequently need to export their documents to
> LaTeX, but who do not have much LaTeX experience (or their knowledge
TL;DR: A list of use cases where using LuaTeX is more advantageous than
using pdfTeX
Many times Org users who frequently need to export their documents to
LaTeX, but who do not have much LaTeX experience (or their knowledge of
the TeX ecosystem is somewhat out of date), find
33 matches
Mail list logo
