From jacksenechal at gmail.com Mon Apr 18 23:09:48 2011 From: jacksenechal at gmail.com (Jack Senechal) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 20:09:48 -0700 Subject: [kramdown-users] Proposal: new option for disabling smart quotes/typography parsers Message-ID: On Mar 4, 2011, at 7:01 AM, Thomas Leitner wrote: > there is a feature request for an option to exclude arbitrary > span/block parsers from the kramdown parser, see [1]. I don't think > that this would be a good idea. > > However, the reason why Justin wants this option is to disable the > smart quotes/typography parsers so that RubyPants/typogruby and > kramdown work better together. Since the smart quotes/typography > parsers are partly based on RubyPants anyway and they don't interfere > with other span parsers, I think it would be okay to provide an option > for disabling them. We could call the option > "parse_typographic_symbols" with a default value of true. > > What do you think? > > Best regards, > Thomas I just joined the list to discuss this particular topic, so I'm glad to see it's already been broached. I would very much like to see an option to disable smart quotes. I don't mind the other typographic symbol replacements, but it would probably be good to have an option on that as well. IMHO, smart quotes are pure evil. I think they make things harder to read, etc. This is mostly personal opinion, but there are times when it could be critical to preserve the regular quotes if the user intends to use those. For instance where one is trying to distinguish between a back tick and a single quote. I can see similar scenarios for ... , -- , etc. The spirit of Markdown and its variants, as I understand it, is to provide a simple and elegant extension to plain text--one which interferes with the content minimally wherever possible and generally feels "light". If there's an option to disable features that can be potentially "invasive", then it's all good. Without that though, it starts to feel a little too much like MS Word (shudder). Just my 2 cents... Thanks for listening :) Jack From t_leitner at gmx.at Thu Apr 28 11:56:43 2011 From: t_leitner at gmx.at (Thomas Leitner) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:56:43 +0200 Subject: [kramdown-users] Proposal: new option for disabling smart quotes/typography parsers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110428175643.10dd38e0@noweto> On 2011-04-18 20:09 -0700 Jack Senechal wrote: > IMHO, smart quotes are pure evil. I think they make things harder to > read, etc. This is mostly personal opinion, but there are times when > it could be critical to preserve the regular quotes if the user > intends to use those. For instance where one is trying to distinguish > between a back tick and a single quote. I can see similar scenarios > for ... , -- , etc. Use the `smart_quotes` option! By setting it to "apos apos quot quot" you get the normal, simple quotation marks instead of the smart quotes! -- Thomas From t_leitner at gmx.at Thu Apr 28 11:42:54 2011 From: t_leitner at gmx.at (Thomas Leitner) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:42:54 +0200 Subject: [kramdown-users] LaTeX conversion of kramdown images broken? In-Reply-To: <4D8F004D.2060302@gmx.at> References: <4D8F004D.2060302@gmx.at> Message-ID: <20110428174254.4a56c516@noweto> On 2011-03-27 11:15 +0200 Michael Franzl wrote: > kramdown-0.13.2 with Ruby 1.9.2 apparently can't convert an image > > ![alt](image.jpg) > > to LaTeX any more: > > /home/path/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/kramdown-0.13.2/lib/kramdown/converter/latex.rb:231:in > `convert_img': undefined method `attr' for {}:Hash (NoMethodError) > > HTML conversion works. kramdown-0.10.0 works too. Thanks for reporting the bug - I have fixed it now. -- Thomas From michaelfranzl at gmx.at Fri Apr 29 11:18:38 2011 From: michaelfranzl at gmx.at (Michael Franzl) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:18:38 +0200 Subject: [kramdown-users] Footnotes inside of LaTeX tables In-Reply-To: <20110215153809.76ecb9cd@noweto> References: <4D4C68D9.7060109@gmx.at> <20110215153809.76ecb9cd@noweto> Message-ID: <4DBAD6CE.5050200@gmx.at> On 02/15/2011 03:38 PM, Thomas Leitner wrote: > On 2011-02-04 22:00 +0100 Michael Franzl wrote: >> Footnotes inside of LaTeX tables are defined with the \tnote command >> instead of \footnote. >> >> Reference: >> >> http://www.namsu.de/latex/kapitel8.html > > Thanks for pointing this out, will have a look at it. Any news on this? Thanks, Michael From t_leitner at gmx.at Sat Apr 30 02:21:36 2011 From: t_leitner at gmx.at (Thomas Leitner) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2011 08:21:36 +0200 Subject: [kramdown-users] Footnotes inside of LaTeX tables In-Reply-To: <4DBAD6CE.5050200@gmx.at> References: <4D4C68D9.7060109@gmx.at> <20110215153809.76ecb9cd@noweto> <4DBAD6CE.5050200@gmx.at> Message-ID: <20110430082136.02439831@noweto> On 2011-04-29 17:18 +0200 Michael Franzl wrote: > On 02/15/2011 03:38 PM, Thomas Leitner wrote: > > On 2011-02-04 22:00 +0100 Michael Franzl wrote: > >> Footnotes inside of LaTeX tables are defined with the \tnote > >> command instead of \footnote. > >> > >> Reference: > >> > >> http://www.namsu.de/latex/kapitel8.html > > > > Thanks for pointing this out, will have a look at it. > > Any news on this? I have fixed this now by using the longtable environment instead of the tabular environment. -- Thomas