[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] [ANN] e-latex back-end: changes to attributes syntax
From: |
Nicolas Goaziou |
Subject: |
Re: [O] [ANN] e-latex back-end: changes to attributes syntax |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:58:09 +0100 |
Hello,
Suvayu Ali <address@hidden> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 05:35:48PM +0100, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
>>
>> Plain lists accept two optional attributes: `:environment' and
>> `:options'. The first one allows to use a non-standard environment
>> (i.e. "inparaenum"). The second one allows to specify optional
>> arguments for that environment (square brackets are not mandatory).
>>
>
> Are these available for org-e-beamer too? I tried without success. It
> would be a great addition (along with the options for images
> below). :)
>
>> Images accept `:float', `:placement' and `:options' as attributes.
>> `:float' accepts a symbol among `wrap', `multicolumn', and
>> `figure', which defines the float environment for the table (if
>> unspecified, an image with a caption will be set in a "figure"
>> environment). `:placement' is a string that will be used as
>> argument for the environment chosen. `:options' is a string that
>> will be used as the optional argument for "includegraphics" macro.
>>
Since Beamer back-end doesn't redefine how images are handled, you can
use the same properties as above, within an attr_latex keyword.
About special environments for plain lists, I'm unsure if this is a good
idea. AFAIK many don't support overlay specifications so it would lead
to errors when one provides both a special environment and an overlay,
i.e.:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
#+attr_beamer: :environment inparaenum :overlay "+-"
- item 1
- item 2
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Also, Beamer has its own way to render standard lists (through themes)
and it could cause problems with foreign packages.
On the other hand, I can still make it easy for an user to shoot himself
in the foot: code-wise, it is cheap. What do you think?
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou