Hello Carsten and all,
I have sent a suggestion in the beamer thread about using comments
for columns,
but I didn't receive my own message from the mailing list (as
usual). Therefore
I'm assuming no one else has received it and I'm going to repeat it
here (sorry
if this is a duplicate).
The idea is using special comments to represent columns when
exporting to beamer
(and maybe other formats). For instance, considering the frames are
in the
third-level headings, a presentation could be like
,----
| * This is a Section
| *** This is a Subsection
| ***** This is the frame title
| Frame content
|
| ***** This is the frame title of another frame
| #+\{0.4
| - This is an item
| - This is an item too
| #+\\0.6
| - Another item
| - Another one
| - One more item
| #+\}
`----
The comment "#+\{" indicates the beginning of a columns environment
(maybe only
"#+{" is better) in addition to the first column. The number "0.4"
indicates the
width of the first column (0.4\textwidth). The comment "#+\\0.6"
creates another
column and the comment "#+\}" closes the columns environment.
I'm not saying this is the best way, but it has the advantage of
being similar
to what we do in beamer (but simpler IMHO) and it would export
without errors
for other formats. Maybe it is better to also implement it for
standard latex
using minipages or something similar and to HTML, but if this is not
desired
then the closing comment could be optional (the columns environment
would then
end when the current slide ends).
With some org functions to mark, swap, etc., columns it could be
easy to
reorganize the columns if desired.
Also, It would be nice if the width could be optional, i.e., if
there are
columns whose widths were not specified then org could sum the
widths that were
specified and distribute the remaining among the columns whose
widths were not
specified. For instance, in a frame with 3 columns one could specify
the width
of the first column as 0.4 and leave the others unspecified. Org
should then
choose a width of 0.3 for each of the remaining two columns.
At last, thank you for the effort to implement native beamer support
in org.
- Darlan Cavalcante
At Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:44:27 +0100,
Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> wrote:
On Nov 29, 2009, at 11:17 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
On Nov 29, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote:
On Nov 29, 2009, at 7:31 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
Aloha all,
Would it make sense to implement Beamer columns with Org-mode
tables?
Hi Thomas,
I cannot see how this would make sense.
Maybe you'd like to elaborate?
- Carsten
Hi Carsten and Sebastian,
This idea might be nonsense or technically infeasible. The
advantage, if it is one, is that the same org file might export to
LaTeX and Beamer with roughly similar results. If headlines are
used below the level of the Beamer frame, then export to LaTeX
becomes problematic, or so it seems to me (and perhaps some others,
if I've read their posts correctly). A column-like arrangement in
a portion of a LaTeX file is sometimes faked by using
\begin{tabular} \end{tabular}, and this naturally brought to mind
Org-mode tables.
Apologies if the signal/noise ratio is distressingly low here.
Hi Thomas, thanks for the extra explanations - however, I still don't
think that this is the way to go.
- Carsten
All the best,
Tom
Thomas S. Dye, Ph.D.
T. S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists, Inc.
Phone: (808) 529-0866 Fax: (808) 529-0884
http://www.tsdye.com
- Carsten
_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode