Hello Everyone
in Latex the verse are written in this format
\begin{verse}
This is line one of verse ........\\
Line two of the verse .............\\ Chap1.1
This is line one of verse ........\\
Line two of the verse .............\\ Chap1.2
\end {verse}
I was wondering how can I put a automatic counter at the end of each verse,
linked to the chapter so that as I can add verses to a particular chapter it
would increase it by one. Something like the one shown above.
Is it something that can be done or far fetched thing? I tried
\begin{enumerate} ... \end{enumerate} that did not work.
I would appreciate your help.
-Anant
________________________________
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 2:35:14 PM
Subject: XeTeX Digest, Vol 72, Issue 23
Send XeTeX mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of XeTeX digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Meho R.)
2. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Petr Tomasek)
3. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Vafa Khalighi)
4. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Rembrandt Wolpert)
5. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Meho R.)
6. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Jonathan Kew)
7. Re: PDF Creator: "bidi"? (Meho R.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 03:03:49 -0800 (PST)
From: "Meho R." <[email protected]>
To: XeTeX <[email protected]>
Subject: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi,
This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very unfair
to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100311/5969fcab/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:13:05 +0100
From: Petr Tomasek <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 03:03:49AM -0800, Meho R. wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
> file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
> language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
> that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very unfair
> to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>
Isn't it the "bidi-package"?
--
Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
Jabber: [email protected]
SIP: [email protected]
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:33:03 +1100
From: Vafa Khalighi <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
> file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
> language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
> that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very
> unfair to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>
>
I have done this because someone in the past requested it. Why is this
unfair?
--
Best wishes,
Vafa Khalighi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100311/cf31c9c7/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:14:24 -0600
From: Rembrandt Wolpert <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
because bidi has done absolutely noting in the creation of the pdf-file from
this minimal text, but claims it:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{bidi,xltxtra}
\setmainfont{STFangsong}
\begin{document}
???
\end{document}
Rembrandt
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 05:33, Vafa Khalighi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
>> file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
>> language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
>> that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very
>> unfair to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>>
>>
> I have done this because someone in the past requested it. Why is this
> unfair?
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vafa Khalighi
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
--
???????????
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100311/f99c2328/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:48:48 -0800 (PST)
From: "Meho R." <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
As noted, because bidi isn't the creator of the PDF file and still claims it
is. "Created by Xe(La)TeX with bidi package" (something like "Created by LaTeX
with hyperref package") would be a little bit more acceptable, don't you think?
________________________________
From: Vafa Khalighi <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 12:33:03 PM
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
>This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
>file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
>language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
>that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very unfair
>to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>
>
I have done this because someone in the past requested it. Why is this unfair?
--
Best wishes,
Vafa Khalighi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100311/30921262/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:09:40 +0000
From: Jonathan Kew <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On 11 Mar 2010, at 17:48, Meho R. wrote:
> As noted, because bidi isn't the creator of the PDF file and still claims it
> is. "Created by Xe(La)TeX with bidi package" (something like "Created by
> LaTeX with hyperref package") would be a little bit more acceptable, don't
> you think?
Personally, I think packages should not be doing this at all (though I believe
hyperref has a long history of it). What if you use both hyperref *and* bidi --
who wins? What if every package author decides to start rewriting the Creator
string?
The only time a package should override the default metadata is when the user
explicitly specifies it, IMO.
JK
> From: Vafa Khalighi <[email protected]>
> To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 12:33:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
>
> This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
> file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
> language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
> that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very unfair
> to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>
> I have done this because someone in the past requested it. Why is this
> unfair?
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vafa Khalighi
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:35:06 -0800 (PST)
From: "Meho R." <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I totally agree. I've never liked seeing hyperref entry in pdf
details/properties, but at least it doesn't negate the real creator of
document. For me, bidi is a very important package and its author and
maintainer deserve all praise, but I really think it shouldn't be in pdf
details/properties. Jonathan has got the point: what about other packages used
in a document, why they don't get their piece of credits?
________________________________
From: Jonathan Kew <[email protected]>
To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 7:09:40 PM
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
On 11 Mar 2010, at 17:48, Meho R. wrote:
> As noted, because bidi isn't the creator of the PDF file and still claims it
> is. "Created by Xe(La)TeX with bidi package" (something like "Created by
> LaTeX with hyperref package") would be a little bit more acceptable, don't
> you think?
Personally, I think packages should not be doing this at all (though I believe
hyperref has a long history of it). What if you use both hyperref *and* bidi --
who wins? What if every package author decides to start rewriting the Creator
string?
The only time a package should override the default metadata is when the user
explicitly specifies it, IMO.
JK
> From: Vafa Khalighi <[email protected]>
> To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thu, March 11, 2010 12:33:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [XeTeX] PDF Creator: "bidi"?
>
> This is question for Vafa: can you explain what is the reason that in .pdf
> file, created using xelatex+polyglossia with use of arabic as secondary
> language (the main is latin), bidi is credited as "creator"? I do understand
> that bidi is used for arabic, but, with due respect, I think it's very unfair
> to declare it as creator application instead of xe(la)tex.
>
> I have done this because someone in the past requested it. Why is this
> unfair?
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vafa Khalighi
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100311/6cc7cf3a/attachment.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
XeTeX mailing list
[email protected]
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
End of XeTeX Digest, Vol 72, Issue 23
*************************************
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
