[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Suggestion : Option enabling LaTeX blocks to non-latex exporters.

From: Emmanuel Charpentier
Subject: Suggestion : Option enabling LaTeX blocks to non-latex exporters.
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2021 14:24:54 +0200
User-agent: Evolution 3.38.3-1

Dear list,

"raw" LaTeX can already be successfully exported by some exporters : both html and odt exporters can translate (a limited subset of) such latex expressions in something palatable to their respective targets (Mathjax and representation MathML respectively).

This does *not* apply to LaTeX marked as such. To be clear :

babble babble $\int_a^b f(x) dx$ noise noise

will export the math _expression_ to  html and odt (if tex:t or tex:dvipng or tex:dvisvgm) ; on the other hand

babble babble @@latex:$\int_a^b f(x) dx$@@ noise noise

will not. Neither will :

#+latex: \[\Phi_{\mu, \sigma}(x) = \frac{e^-{\frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}}}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}}\,.\]

nor :

#+begin_export latex
\[\Phi_{\mu, \sigma}(x) = \frac{e^-{\frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2}}}{\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}}\,.\]

This has an annoying consequence : a function cannot (easily) return a LaTeX block. One can return a raw result, but this loses the link between the function and its result(s).

John Kitchin has suggested (https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2021-07/msg00099.html) to wrap raw latex code in a drawer ; this works, but I am unable to understand how, and I do not know what are the consequences.

Having an option allowing latex code marked as such to be passed to other exporters (possibly with conversion) would allow a "cleaner" solution.

What do you think ?

Emmanuel Charpentier

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]