Re: [O] List of figures

[John Kitchin]

check out this implementation for tables: http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu/blog/2014/03/01/Getting-a-list-of-tables-in-an-org-buffer/

John

-----------------------------------
John Kitchin
Associate Professor
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Thomas S. Dye <address@hidden> wrote:

Aloha John,

John Kitchin <address@hidden> writes:

> Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures be?
> Is it only for export?

Yes, it is.

> I would make a link:  [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the buffer
> and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures. You could
> alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also specify how it
> exports, eg.
>
> [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]

This is a neat idea. Thanks!

All the best,
Tom

>
> That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would also
> happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize figures as
> extensions in the file links.
>
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------
> John Kitchin
> Associate Professor
> Doherty Hall A207F
> Department of Chemical Engineering
> Carnegie Mellon University
> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> 412-268-7803
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Aloha Nicolas,
>>
>> Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > address@hidden (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>> >
>> >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in some
>> >> other back-ends.  However, its absence in LaTeX export seems unusual.
>> >
>> > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>> > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>> >
>> >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX export (and
>> >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>> >
>> > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for major
>> > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth the
>> > trouble:
>> >
>> >   #+toc: figures
>> >
>> > vs.
>> >
>> >   #+latex: \listoffigures
>>
>> AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly.  I'm confident that it will
>> let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>>
>> My original query came about because I was trying to write Org markup
>> and *not* drop down to LaTeX.  In this context--Org as a lightweight
>> markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>> "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is missing a
>> piece.
>>
>> I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
>> back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>>
>> All the best,
>> Tom
>>
>> --
>> Thomas S. Dye
>> http://www.tsdye.com
>>
>>
> Maybe I am missing something, what would the utility of #+toc: figures
> be? Is it only for export?
>
> I would make a link: [[elisp:org-list-of-figures]] where
> org-list-of-figures is an emacs-lisp function that would parse the
> buffer and present you with a list of clickable links to the figures.
> You could alternatively make this a new org-link, so you could also
> specify how it exports, eg.
>
> [[lof:click-me][List of Figures]]
>
> That would be pure org-markup, and make org more useful, and it would
> also happen to support LaTeX export too. I guess you would recognize
> figures as extensions in the file links.
>
> John
>
> -----------------------------------
> John Kitchin
> Associate Professor
> Doherty Hall A207F
> Department of Chemical Engineering
> Carnegie Mellon University
> Pittsburgh, PA 15213
> 412-268-7803
> http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Thomas S. Dye <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>     Aloha Nicolas,
>
>     Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
>
>     > Hello,
>     >
>     > address@hidden (Thomas S. Dye) writes:
>     >
>     >> I can imagine that a list of figures is a difficult problem in
>     some
>     >> other back-ends. However, its absence in LaTeX export seems
>     unusual.
>     >
>     > Org doesn't cover all LaTeX facilities. There are #+LATEX:
>     > and #+BEGIN_LATEX...#+END_LATEX to fill the gap.
>     >
>     >> Would it make sense to have this work as expected for LaTeX
>     export (and
>     >> perhaps other back-ends where it does make sense)
>     >
>     > We can start to discuss what a good implementation could be for
>     major
>     > back-ends. But implementing it for LaTeX only is, IMO, not worth
>     the
>     > trouble:
>     >
>     > #+toc: figures
>     >
>     > vs.
>     >
>     > #+latex: \listoffigures
>
>     AFAICT the new exporter works flawlessly. I'm confident that it
>     will
>     let me produce LaTeX to any practical specification.
>
>     My original query came about because I was trying to write Org
>     markup
>     and *not* drop down to LaTeX. In this context--Org as a
>     lightweight
>     markup language--the possibility of creating all but one of the
>     "lists-of" with #+TOC: seems like the markup language core is
>     missing a
>     piece.
>
>     I look forward to the discussion of implementations for the major
>     back-ends. Let me know if I can help in any way.
>
>     All the best,
>     Tom
>
>     --
>     Thomas S. Dye
>     http://www.tsdye.com
>
>
>

--
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com