Re: [O] unintended strike-through in table
Skip Collins writes:
> I do not believe this is intended behavior for +strike-through+ text.
> The + symbol serves triple duty in org syntax as a an indicator for
> +stricken words+, a line drawing symbol in tables, and a #+keyword
> prefix.
It can also be an item which is a problem with LaTeX math.
Example:
\begin{equation}
x
+ y
wv
- z
\end{equation}
is translated to
\begin{equation}
x
\begin{itemize}
\item y
\end{itemize}
wv
\begin{itemize}
\item z
\end{itemize}
\end{equation}
I guess one could wrap it in #+begin_latex · #+end_latex, but that would
be cubersome.
–Rasmus
--
In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice they are not
Re: [O] unintended strike-through in table
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Bastien wrote: > Hi Skip, > > Skip Collins writes: > > > I see little reason to continue to support +strike-through+ text. > > Perhaps the simplest solution would be to deprecate stricken text and > > disable it by default, allowing for an option to turn it on for > > backward compatibility. > > I agree. If no one object, I will make this change soon. > > Although I cannot recall myself having used strike-through text I wonder what the reason is for removing the functionality? Is it just this, that it (probably) isn't used much? Not a good argument in my book (especially due to the uncertainty in usage). Would it not be better to fix the problem at hand? Maybe by changing the symbol since + seems overloaded, would not - be a better choice? On a side-note, what is the intended behavior of bold, italic, strike-through etc. regarding line-breaks? Since a single long line has the same meaning in org as multiple consecutive short lines I think the markup-elements above also should support multiple lines of text (but not be valid between paragraphs) Regards Gustav
Re: [O] unintended strike-through in table
Hi Skip, Skip Collins writes: > I see little reason to continue to support +strike-through+ text. > Perhaps the simplest solution would be to deprecate stricken text and > disable it by default, allowing for an option to turn it on for > backward compatibility. I agree. If no one object, I will make this change soon. Thanks, -- Bastien
[O] unintended strike-through in table
When I open the following table in org, the characters from the first + symbol in +bar to the last + symbol on the next line are struck out, i.e. drawn with a line through the text. #+STARTUP: showall * foo | C | D | | E | +bar | |---+--| I do not believe this is intended behavior for +strike-through+ text. The + symbol serves triple duty in org syntax as a an indicator for +stricken words+, a line drawing symbol in tables, and a #+keyword prefix. I see little reason to continue to support +strike-through+ text. Perhaps the simplest solution would be to deprecate stricken text and disable it by default, allowing for an option to turn it on for backward compatibility.
