Re: Org mode rant

[Emanuel Berg]

Jean Louis wrote:

> Maybe it is not, but I use Org export functions to get nice
> PDF documents that people practically use in the field.

Are you even allowed to do that?

>> re: LaTeX I was once told "you are obsessed with LaTeX"
>> (Swedish "du är besatt av LaTeX", it literally means that).
>> I answered "Yeah? What about you?" ("Okej? Du då?") and he
>> just said "No" ("Nej") and left.
>
> Who knows which latex you meant... This one is rather
> spelled as LaTeH the other one is used for balloons and
> population minimization.

I don't remember what I used back then but now, if you by
"which latex" mean what compiler and version, the answer is

  $ xelatex --version
  XeTeX 3.14159265-2.6-0.999992 (TeX Live 2020/Debian)

By LaTeX I mean "[the] language [that] is described in the book
LaTeX - A Document Preparation System." (latex(1))

>>> Markdown
>> 
>> Markdown a lot of FOSS people have been in touch with since
>> the READMEs with all the square brackets you get when you
>> get FOSS software, that is Markdown.
>> 
>> Unbelievable BTW, I was just using it!
>
> I have no idea why would README be in Markdown, but never
> mind. Unless one wants to expand it into HTML, readme looks
> better without Markdown.

There are several reasons to do that but yes one is the
possibility to produce the material in various other formats.

I think Markdown looks better than plain text in markdown-mode
(unbelievably not in vanilla Emacs, but I've already written
about that so no more about that), I think the syntax isn't
really disturbing anyone, it is also clear; apart from that
font lock makes it colorful as well.

> First began using it back in the same year when it was
> published, today almost everybody uses it. I had static
> website generation before any free software came up with it.
> Today there are many. At that time, before maybe 16 years,
> would I mention static website generation I would almost
> get stoned.

What is that, it generates static webpages? From some other
data format, when that data is complete? IMO HTML is so
simple one can just as well do it manually so don't have to
bother with anything moving or still.

> Markdown and few other markups for HTML have one huge flaw
> that nobody talks about, it misses the size for pictures
> which in the end turns HTML invalid. That is why I never use
> any other Markdown but Discount markdown for images. It is
> anyway fastest.

What do you mean "misses the size for pictures"?

You are right people don't seem to talk about this problem.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal