On Tue, 2022-07-26 at 13:30 +0700, Max Nikulin wrote:
> I have not tested it, but I expect you can use
> - export filter that removes zero-width spaces at the last export
> stage.
> I assume that your documents do not contain them besides markup
> workaround
> - #+latex_header: \DeclareUnicodeChar
On 26/07/2022 11:26, K K wrote:
On 2022-07-26 Tue. 09:23 +0700，Max Nikulin wrote：
> However the suggestion was namely to use U+200B ZERO WIDTH SPACE and
> it
> is actually implemented since `org-emphasis-regexp-components'
> currently
> contains [:space:].
> ...
> K, could you, please, clarify
On 2022-07-26 Tue. 09:23 +0700，Max Nikulin wrote：
> However the suggestion was namely to use U+200B ZERO WIDTH SPACE and
> it
> is actually implemented since `org-emphasis-regexp-components'
> currently
> contains [:space:].
> ...
> K, could you, please, clarify what is your particular use case?
On 26/07/2022 08:26, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
K writes:
The thread and post I am mentioning is at
https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87bodxy77m@bzg.ath.cx/
That thread references yet another thread at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/59881/focus=59971
However, gname links are no lon
K writes:
> The thread and post I am mentioning is at
> https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87bodxy77m@bzg.ath.cx/
That thread references yet another thread at
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/59881/focus=59971
However, gname links are no longer working.
Do you happen to know which t
Hello everyone, I am a chinese user and also came across this problem.
Bastin once wrote this almost a decade ago:
> More precisely this can be included when we decide to drop support
> of Emacs 22.
>
> Does anyone know what is the current backward compatibility state
> of major native Emacs
> Bastin once wrote this almost a decade ago:
Sorry for the misspelling, the name is Bastien, not Bastin.
The thread and post I am mentioning is at
https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87bodxy77m@bzg.ath.cx/
Hello everyone, I am a chinese user and also came across this problem.
Bastin once wrote this almost a decade ago:
> More precisely this can be included when we decide to drop support
> of Emacs 22.
>
> Does anyone know what is the current backward compatibility state
> of major native Emacs
