Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Detlef Steuer writes:
>> Introducing the item is easy, but making something out of it in each
>> back-end is not, as it requires to define what title:nil means there.
>> In particular, should it be "an empty title" or something else?
>>
>> For example, ascii back-end provides a banner as its title. Should
>> title:nil remove the title from the banner or should it remove the
>> banner altogether, thus overriding date:t and author:t items.
>>
>> Likewise, should title:nil insert "\title{}" in a LaTeX document
>> header, remove the "\maketitle{}" line, or perhaps, both?
>
> To be consistent over backends I think it should be implemented as
> an empty title string. If date:t or/and author:t are specified these
> should show up somewhere.
>
> \maketitle{} should be removed only, if a titlepage would appear empty
> in the exported document.
>
> Just the usual 2c worth of opinion.
IMO, it just shouldn't set title in LaTeX. When I use author:nil
\author{·} is simply not set and could be loaded via another file. I
would also remove the \maketitle command. I don't have any
particularly good argument for this, other than it feels right. . .
Alternatively, there could be a yet another option maketitle:if-title,
maketitle:always. . .
With the text backend. I would make the banner dependent on the
presence of a title. I.e. I'd probably go for no title, no banner.
Though it's less clear here to what extend a title-less banner makes
sense here.
—Rasmus
--
When in doubt, do it!
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Am Wed, 21 May 2014 14:47:37 +0200
schrieb Nicolas Goaziou :
> Hello,
>
> Christian Kellermann writes:
>
> > I first thought about using ODT_STYLES_FILE in the list form and
> > pick out the content.xml from there, but maybe that's a bit
> > unexpected as one might use a different content than from the style.
> >
> > But the control flow as it is now would need to be refactored to
> > make this a nice patch too.
> >
> > I shall resend this patch with proper docstrings and manual patches
> > if you like.
>
> Please do.
>
> >> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
> >>
> >> #+OPTIONS: title:nil
> >>
> >> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have
> >> date:nil and author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be
> >> used for booleans. This should be an OPTIONS item.
> >
> > I don't feel qualified to decide on this. I can provide the needed
> > patches though.
>
> Introducing the item is easy, but making something out of it in each
> back-end is not, as it requires to define what title:nil means there.
> In particular, should it be "an empty title" or something else?
>
> For example, ascii back-end provides a banner as its title. Should
> title:nil remove the title from the banner or should it remove the
> banner altogether, thus overriding date:t and author:t items.
>
> Likewise, should title:nil insert "\title{}" in a LaTeX document
> header, remove the "\maketitle{}" line, or perhaps, both?
To be consistent over backends I think it should be implemented as
an empty title string. If date:t or/and author:t are specified these
should show up somewhere.
\maketitle{} should be removed only, if a titlepage would appear empty
in the exported document.
Just the usual 2c worth of opinion.
Detlef
>
> It seems that you answered to that question regarding ODT back-end
> though.
>
> WDYT?
>
>
> Regards,
>
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Hello,
Christian Kellermann writes:
> I first thought about using ODT_STYLES_FILE in the list form and
> pick out the content.xml from there, but maybe that's a bit unexpected
> as one might use a different content than from the style.
>
> But the control flow as it is now would need to be refactored to
> make this a nice patch too.
>
> I shall resend this patch with proper docstrings and manual patches
> if you like.
Please do.
>> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
>>
>> #+OPTIONS: title:nil
>>
>> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and
>> author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans.
>> This should be an OPTIONS item.
>
> I don't feel qualified to decide on this. I can provide the needed
> patches though.
Introducing the item is easy, but making something out of it in each
back-end is not, as it requires to define what title:nil means there. In
particular, should it be "an empty title" or something else?
For example, ascii back-end provides a banner as its title. Should
title:nil remove the title from the banner or should it remove the
banner altogether, thus overriding date:t and author:t items.
Likewise, should title:nil insert "\title{}" in a LaTeX document header,
remove the "\maketitle{}" line, or perhaps, both?
It seems that you answered to that question regarding ODT back-end
though.
WDYT?
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou writes: > I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an > > #+OPTIONS: title:nil > > feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and > author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans. > This should be an OPTIONS item. +1! -- Bastien
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Am Tue, 20 May 2014 16:37:45 +0800
schrieb Eric Abrahamsen :
> Rasmus writes:
>
> > Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> >
> >> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
> >>
> >> #+OPTIONS: title:nil
> >>
> >> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have
> >> date:nil and author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be
> >> used for booleans. This should be an OPTIONS item.
> >
> > That's nicer than a blank title ("#+TITLE: ").
> >
> > I prefer the earlier ox-behavior where no title would be printed if
> > title was missing, rather than using the file-name. The file name
> > is never interesting in my work flow. If introducing a title
> > option it would be nice if an option is "print title if present" so
> > that this can be set by default.
>
> +1
+2
Have fought with "set filename as title" before, would like and use
such an option.
Detlef
>
> I'm forever deleting the title because I forget to insert an empty
> string #+TITLE option. If there was an `org-export-with-title' option
> I'd set it to nil and be happy 80% of the time.
>
> E
>
>
>
--
Detlef Steuer
---
Dr. Detlef Steuer
Helmut-Schmidt-Universität
Fakultät WiSo
Holstenhofweg 85
22043 Hamburg
Tel: 040/6541-2819
mail: ste...@hsu-hh.de
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Rasmus writes:
> That's nicer than a blank title ("#+TITLE: ").
>
> I prefer the earlier ox-behavior where no title would be printed if
> title was missing, rather than using the file-name. The file name is
> never interesting in my work flow. If introducing a title option it
> would be nice if an option is "print title if present" so that this
> can be set by default.
I can second this, the filename never looks nice when doing an export.
Kind regards,
Christian
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Rasmus writes:
> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>
>> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
>>
>> #+OPTIONS: title:nil
>>
>> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and
>> author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans.
>> This should be an OPTIONS item.
>
> That's nicer than a blank title ("#+TITLE: ").
>
> I prefer the earlier ox-behavior where no title would be printed if
> title was missing, rather than using the file-name. The file name is
> never interesting in my work flow. If introducing a title option it
> would be nice if an option is "print title if present" so that this
> can be set by default.
+1
I'm forever deleting the title because I forget to insert an empty
string #+TITLE option. If there was an `org-export-with-title' option
I'd set it to nil and be happy 80% of the time.
E
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Hi! * Nicolas Goaziou [140519 18:16]: > It is already possible to override the varible file-wise with: > > #+BIND: org-odt-content-template-file "somefile" > > I'm not sure it is worth adding another keyword. OTOH, there's also > ODT_STYLES_FILE and they are quite symmetric, so one could expect to be > able to set both. But then, `org-odt-content-template-file''s docstring > needs to be updated, and the feature should be documented in the manual. I first thought about using ODT_STYLES_FILE in the list form and pick out the content.xml from there, but maybe that's a bit unexpected as one might use a different content than from the style. But the control flow as it is now would need to be refactored to make this a nice patch too. I shall resend this patch with proper docstrings and manual patches if you like. > > Also, it should be > > (:odt-content-template-file "ODT_CONTENT_TEMPLATE_FILE" nil > org-odt-content-template-file t) Ah of course. > > > * Avoid inserting the document title as the first thing in the > > document contents, as there already is a title set in a title page > > in the template. As org-mode already sets the title data tag this > > can be used in the template to generate the correct title. However > > inserting the title as text is not desireable in that scenario. > > I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an > > #+OPTIONS: title:nil > > feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and > author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans. > This should be an OPTIONS item. I don't feel qualified to decide on this. I can provide the needed patches though. Thanks for your review! Regards, Christian -- May you be peaceful, may you live in safety, may you be free from suffering, and may you live with ease.
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
>
> #+OPTIONS: title:nil
>
> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and
> author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans.
> This should be an OPTIONS item.
That's nicer than a blank title ("#+TITLE: ").
I prefer the earlier ox-behavior where no title would be printed if
title was missing, rather than using the file-name. The file name is
never interesting in my work flow. If introducing a title option it
would be nice if an option is "print title if present" so that this
can be set by default.
—Rasmus
--
El Rey ha muerto. ¡Larga vida al Rey!
Re: [O] [PATCH] Improve usage of odt content templates
Hello, Christian Kellermann writes: > I have been using org-mode's odt exporter heavily for the last days > with the attached patches. These scratch an itch I have and I submit > them to this list in the hope of being useful to others. Thank you for your patches. > * Possibility to override the globally defined > org-odt-content-template-file variable in the document It is already possible to override the varible file-wise with: #+BIND: org-odt-content-template-file "somefile" I'm not sure it is worth adding another keyword. OTOH, there's also ODT_STYLES_FILE and they are quite symmetric, so one could expect to be able to set both. But then, `org-odt-content-template-file''s docstring needs to be updated, and the feature should be documented in the manual. Also, it should be (:odt-content-template-file "ODT_CONTENT_TEMPLATE_FILE" nil org-odt-content-template-file t) > * Avoid inserting the document title as the first thing in the > document contents, as there already is a title set in a title page > in the template. As org-mode already sets the title data tag this > can be used in the template to generate the correct title. However > inserting the title as text is not desireable in that scenario. I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an #+OPTIONS: title:nil feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans. This should be an OPTIONS item. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
