Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[ypuntot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 695 bytes --]

Is it related with AUTHOR property?
I am starting to add these properties to every book, and chapter of the book, that I study. I hope this doesn't lead to a suboptimal workflow.

Doesn't this work?

:PROPERTIES:
    :AUTHOR:   García-Ael, Cristina and Pérez-Garín, Daniel and Recio Saboya, Patricia
    :BTYPE:    incollection
    :BOOKTITLE: Psicología de los Grupos
    :TITLE:    Métodos y Técnicas de Investigación en Psicología de los Grupos.
  
    :PUBLISHER: UNED

    :ADDRESS:  C/ Bravo Murillo, 38; 28015; Madrid
    :INSTITUTION: UNED
    :YEAR:     2017
    :CHAPTER:  2
    :PAGES:    49-83
    :END:

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2213 bytes --]

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Juan Manuel Macías]

ypuntot writes:

> Is it related with AUTHOR property? 
> I am starting to add these properties to every book, and chapter of
> the book, that I study. I hope this doesn't lead to a suboptimal
> workflow. 
>
> Doesn't this work? 
>
> :PROPERTIES: 
>     :AUTHOR:   García-Ael, Cristina and Pérez-Garín, Daniel and Recio
> Saboya, Patricia 
>     :BTYPE:    incollection 
>     :BOOKTITLE: Psicología de los Grupos 
>     :TITLE:    Métodos y Técnicas de Investigación en Psicología de
> los Grupos. 
>    
>     :PUBLISHER: UNED 
>
>     :ADDRESS:  C/ Bravo Murillo, 38; 28015; Madrid 
>     :INSTITUTION: UNED 
>     :YEAR:     2017 
>     :CHAPTER:  2 
>     :PAGES:    49-83 
>     :END: 


What we are dealing with here is the keyword #+AUTHOR or the
EXPORT_AUTHOR property (when exporting a subtree), that is, the author
of the document (see 'Export settings' in the Org Manual), not the
AUTHOR property of org-ref. Your workflow is correct.

Possible LaTeX export bug: Footnotes in items

[Eric Anderson]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 976 bytes --]

Hi All,

I'm new to the developers' mailing list, so I hope this is the right place
to post potential bugs.  I don't claim to know exactly why, but at least
for certain TOC options, the LaTeX exporter produces invalid code for item
titles containing footnotes.  I've attached a minimal (non)working example.

The resulting LaTeX code (also attached) uses \footnote inside \section and
\paragraph macros, producing compiler errors.  A little googling turns up
the following comp.text.tex usenet post
https://comp.text.tex.narkive.com/lkZWQYaS/using-footnotes-in-paragraph,
explaining that \footnote is fragile and cannot be used in those contexts
without \protect.  Manually adding \protect before \footnote in the
automatically-generated tex file appears to produce correct results.

I don't know if the best fix is to always \protect \footnotes in LaTeX
export, or if more contextual smarts are required, but this seems like an
issue worth addressing.

Cheers!
Eric Anderson

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1237 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: org-bug-mwe.org --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 73 bytes --]

#+OPTIONS: toc:nil H:6
* a [fn:: note a]
** b
*** b
**** d [fn:: note b]

[-- Attachment #3: org-bug-mwe.tex --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 847 bytes --]

% Created 2024-01-22 Mon 15:34
% Intended LaTeX compiler: pdflatex
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{rotating}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{capt-of}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\author{Eric Anderson}
\date{\today}
\title{}
\hypersetup{
 pdfauthor={Eric Anderson},
 pdftitle={},
 pdfkeywords={},
 pdfsubject={},
 pdfcreator={Emacs 27.2 (Org mode 9.6.9)}, 
 pdflang={English}}
\usepackage[style=ieee]{biblatex}

\begin{document}

\section{a \footnote{note a}}
\label{sec:orgc7711ed}
\subsection{b}
\label{sec:orgc167c8a}
\subsubsection{b}
\label{sec:org14707a4}
\paragraph{d \footnote{note b}}
\label{sec:org6daeb07}
\end{document}

[BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Ihor Radchenko]

Eric Anderson <kluwak@gmail.com> writes:

> The resulting LaTeX code (also attached) uses \footnote inside \section and
> \paragraph macros, producing compiler errors.  A little googling turns up
> the following comp.text.tex usenet post
> https://comp.text.tex.narkive.com/lkZWQYaS/using-footnotes-in-paragraph,
> explaining that \footnote is fragile and cannot be used in those contexts
> without \protect.  Manually adding \protect before \footnote in the
> automatically-generated tex file appears to produce correct results.
>
> I don't know if the best fix is to always \protect \footnotes in LaTeX
> export, or if more contextual smarts are required, but this seems like an
> issue worth addressing.

Confirmed.

\protect is not a good idea. There is a reason why LaTeX refuses
footnotes in titles - titles can appear in multiple places in the
document (TOC, page footer, etc) and thus references to the footnotes
are non-deterministic.

https://texfaq.org/FAQ-ftnsect suggests to use
\usepackage[stable]{footmisc}
or to pass optional argument to \section without footnote
\section[title]{title\footnote{title ftnt}}

The footmisc package is a nice solution, but it has certain requirements
about loading order. In particular, it must be loaded after certain
packages (setspace, memoir). We cannot yet control the \usepackage
ordering in LaTeX preamble and always place default LaTeX packages first
- something we cannot do for footmisc.

The \section[...]{...} approach may work, but it is tricky - it is
completely up to the `org-latex-classes'. So, we may have to use regexp
replacement, which might be fragile.

So, I prefer the first approach with footmisc. But we can only do it
after Timothy's patch introducing more flexible templating system is
landed.

CCing Timothy.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Max Nikulin]

On 24/01/2024 19:11, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> The \section[...]{...} approach may work, but it is tricky - it is
> completely up to the `org-latex-classes'. So, we may have to use regexp
> replacement, which might be fragile.

ox supports the ALT_TITLE property and ox-latex already adds it using 
regexp. So it should possible to define this property with stripped 
footnote by an export filter. I have not tested it, but ALT_TITLE and 
@@latex:\protect@@ might be a workaround.

I recall some tricks with \footnotemark and \footnotetext, but I do not 
remember details and whether it may work for section titles. 
Complications may arise if a heading title has several footnotes.

Perhaps it is better to avoid footnotes in titles and to add some phrase 
to the body instead.

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Max Nikulin writes:

> I recall some tricks with \footnotemark and \footnotetext, but I do
> not remember details and whether it may work for section titles.
> Complications may arise if a heading title has several footnotes.

ox-latex has 'org-latex--delayed-footnotes-definitions': "[...] This
function is used within constructs that don't support \footnote{}
command (e.g., an item tag). In that case, \footnotemark is used within
the construct and the function just outside of it."

The \footnotetext/\footnotemark option works well for specific cases,
but in general I don't like to abuse this method.

> Perhaps it is better to avoid footnotes in titles and to add some
> phrase to the body instead.

That is the ideal scenario. I also believe that footnotes should be
avoided in section headings, if possible. Or at least, have another type
of numbering (symbols, letters...). The manyfoot and bigfoot packages
allow constructions of this type, with various footnote apparatus.

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

-- 
Juan Manuel Macías -- 

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Colin Baxter]

>>>>> Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

    > Max Nikulin writes:
    >> I recall some tricks with \footnotemark and \footnotetext, but I
    >> do not remember details and whether it may work for section
    >> titles.  Complications may arise if a heading title has several
    >> footnotes.

    > ox-latex has 'org-latex--delayed-footnotes-definitions': "[...]
    > This function is used within constructs that don't support
    > \footnote{} command (e.g., an item tag). In that case,
    > \footnotemark is used within the construct and the function just
    > outside of it."

    > The \footnotetext/\footnotemark option works well for specific
    > cases, but in general I don't like to abuse this method.

    >> Perhaps it is better to avoid footnotes in titles and to add some
    >> phrase to the body instead.

    > That is the ideal scenario. I also believe that footnotes should
    > be avoided in section headings, if possible. Or at least, have
    > another type of numbering (symbols, letters...). The manyfoot and
    > bigfoot packages allow constructions of this type, with various
    > footnote apparatus.

Indeed, but many journals *require* footnotes in titles, especially for
affiliation, email, etc.

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Colin Baxter writes:

>     >> Perhaps it is better to avoid footnotes in titles and to add some
>     >> phrase to the body instead.
>
>     > That is the ideal scenario. I also believe that footnotes should
>     > be avoided in section headings, if possible. Or at least, have
>     > another type of numbering (symbols, letters...). The manyfoot and
>     > bigfoot packages allow constructions of this type, with various
>     > footnote apparatus.
>
> Indeed, but many journals *require* footnotes in titles, especially for
> affiliation, email, etc.

Notes on article titles (and even on the author name) are a slightly
different case from notes on section titles. In LaTeX there is the
"\thanks" command, which inserts footnotes for title and author,
numbered with fnsymbol. For example:

...
\title{Lorem ipsum dolor\thanks{blah blah}}
...

Org does not have support for this type of notes in the #+title or
#+author keywords. For LaTeX you can use a macro. For backends like odt
it is trickier. Look at this thread:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-humanities/2024-01/msg00000.html

I think it would be nice if Org had some kind of support for notes in
#+title and #+author...

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Ihor Radchenko]

Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

> ...
> \title{Lorem ipsum dolor\thanks{blah blah}}
> ...
>
> Org does not have support for this type of notes in the #+title or
> #+author keywords. For LaTeX you can use a macro.

Hmm.
The reason footnotes are not allowed in #+title and other keywords is
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git/commit/?id=7ebe87e2d5fb6c

    Inserting footnote references in parsed keywords (e.g., TITLE or
    CAPTION) can lead to subtle bugs.  Indeed, it is impossible to know in
    time if that particular footnote is going to be used in the output,
    and, therefore, if it should count, e.g., in
    `org-export-get-footnote-number'.

However, I am not sure about that line of reasoning - we generally don't
know if *any* given footnote reference is going to be used in the output
or not because export backend may skip references or whole parts of the
original Org file. Same for user filters.

So, I am leaning towards reverting that commit - that will allow things
like

#+TITLE: This is a test title[fn::This is test]

If we need special handling for footnotes in title (like using \thanks
instead of \footnote), it is easy.

> ... For backends like odt
> it is trickier. Look at this thread:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-humanities/2024-01/msg00000.html
>
> I think it would be nice if Org had some kind of support for notes in
> #+title and #+author...

No idea about how to do it in ODT. If someone familiar with OpenDocument
spec can help, it would be welcome.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles

[Max Nikulin]

On 26/01/2024 19:53, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> So, I am leaning towards reverting that commit - that will allow things
> like
> 
> #+TITLE: This is a test title[fn::This is test]

I hope, document metadata will be generated with stripped footnotes.

[DISCUSSION] Allowing footnote-references inside parsed keywords (#+AUTHOR, #+TITLE, etc) (was: [BUG] Footnotes in section titles)

[Ihor Radchenko]

Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:

> On 26/01/2024 19:53, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
>> So, I am leaning towards reverting that commit - that will allow things
>> like
>> 
>> #+TITLE: This is a test title[fn::This is test]
>
> I hope, document metadata will be generated with stripped footnotes.

This is a good point.

For now, [fn::This is test], when passed to exporters, is simply treated
as plain text.

If we change the parser nesting rules, Org will pass footnote-reference
objects instead.

Then, in a number of parsers, if something like
(org-export-data (plist-get info :title) info) or
(org-export-data author info)
is used, footnotes may break export because metadata fields often have
special rules about markup that is allowed inside.

In particular, ox-odt will be broken; ox-latex will be broken.

Of course, we can adjust built-in backends to take into account the new
parsing rules, but we have no control over the third-party backends.

On the other hand, when user exports something like
#+AUTHOR: John Doe[fn::935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001]
it is probably not exported as expected anyway.
So, changing things from unexpected export to failing export may not be
a critical regression.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allowing footnote-references inside parsed keywords (#+AUTHOR, #+TITLE, etc)

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Ihor Radchenko writes:

> Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 26/01/2024 19:53, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
>>> So, I am leaning towards reverting that commit - that will allow things
>>> like
>>> 
>>> #+TITLE: This is a test title[fn::This is test]
>>
>> I hope, document metadata will be generated with stripped footnotes.
>
> This is a good point.
>
> For now, [fn::This is test], when passed to exporters, is simply treated
> as plain text.
>
> If we change the parser nesting rules, Org will pass footnote-reference
> objects instead.
>
> Then, in a number of parsers, if something like
> (org-export-data (plist-get info :title) info) or
> (org-export-data author info)
> is used, footnotes may break export because metadata fields often have
> special rules about markup that is allowed inside.
>
> In particular, ox-odt will be broken; ox-latex will be broken.
>
> Of course, we can adjust built-in backends to take into account the new
> parsing rules, but we have no control over the third-party backends.
>
> On the other hand, when user exports something like
>
> #+AUTHOR: John Doe[fn::935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001]
> it is probably not exported as expected anyway.

How about using dedicated keywords? Something like:

#+FN_AUTHOR: footnote text
#+FN_TITLE: footnote text

I give these two examples because they are the two places where a
footnote of this type is expected. I know: it's ugly and corseted (what
to do if a title has more than one footnote or an "inner" footnote?).
But I suppose it would be safe for a basic case, since it would only be
necessary to modify org-latex-template, org-odt-template, etc., without
risk of unexpected results.

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allowing footnote-references inside parsed keywords (#+AUTHOR, #+TITLE, etc)

[Ihor Radchenko]

Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

>> #+AUTHOR: John Doe[fn::935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20535-0001]
>> it is probably not exported as expected anyway.
>
> How about using dedicated keywords? Something like:
>
> #+FN_AUTHOR: footnote text
> #+FN_TITLE: footnote text

What if you have multiple authors?

If you mean

#+AUTHOR: author1
#+FN_AUTHOR: footnote for author 1
#+AUTHOR: author2
#+FN_AUTHOR: footnote for author 2

, it is actually problematic because the code concatenates the values of
#+AUTHOR keywords before processing, and it is hard to know which author
corresponds to which footnote.


If we really need something safe, pre-processing values in ox.el and
producing backward-compatible :author value and addition
:author-w-footnotes value in the export INFO plist would be more
reasonable and less ugly. Still ugly though.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: [DISCUSSION] Allowing footnote-references inside parsed keywords (#+AUTHOR, #+TITLE, etc)

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Ihor Radchenko writes:

> #+AUTHOR: author1
> #+FN_AUTHOR: footnote for author 1
>
> #+AUTHOR: author2
> #+FN_AUTHOR: footnote for author 2

Sorry if this is off topic, but something like this:

#+AUTHOR: Fred Astaire
#+AUTHOR: Ginger Rogers

is exported to LaTeX as:

\author{Fred Astaire Ginger Rogers}

Shouldn't there be some separation? In LaTeX the usual thing is:

\author{Fred Astaire \and Ginger Rogers}

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

-- 
Juan Manuel Macías -- Composición tipográfica, tratamiento de datos, diseño editorial y ortotipografía

Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords (was: [DISCUSSION] Allowing footnote-references inside parsed keywords (#+AUTHOR, #+TITLE, etc))

[Ihor Radchenko]

Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

> Sorry if this is off topic, but something like this:
>
> #+AUTHOR: Fred Astaire
> #+AUTHOR: Ginger Rogers
>
> is exported to LaTeX as:
>
> \author{Fred Astaire Ginger Rogers}
>
> Shouldn't there be some separation? In LaTeX the usual thing is:
>
> \author{Fred Astaire \and Ginger Rogers}

You can do

#+AUTHOR: Fred
#+AUTHOR: Astaire
#+AUTHOR: and Ginger
#+AUTHOR: Rogers

The values are simply concatenated before passing to the exporter.

Can we concatenate with "\and"? Sure. But not by default or it would be
a breaking change.

In fact, you can already concatenate with "\and" when exporting
subtrees:

(push '("EXPORT_AUTHOR" . "\\and ") org-property-separators)

then

* This is test
:PROPERTIES:
:EXPORT_AUTHOR: John Doe
:EXPORT_AUTHOR+: David Stefanson
:END:
Text.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Ihor Radchenko writes:

> Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> Sorry if this is off topic, but something like this:
>>
>> #+AUTHOR: Fred Astaire
>> #+AUTHOR: Ginger Rogers
>>
>> is exported to LaTeX as:
>>
>> \author{Fred Astaire Ginger Rogers}
>>
>> Shouldn't there be some separation? In LaTeX the usual thing is:
>>
>> \author{Fred Astaire \and Ginger Rogers}
>
> You can do
>
> #+AUTHOR: Fred
> #+AUTHOR: Astaire
>
> #+AUTHOR: and Ginger
> #+AUTHOR: Rogers
>
> The values are simply concatenated before passing to the exporter.
>
> Can we concatenate with "\and"? Sure. But not by default or it would be
> a breaking change.

Thanks for the explanation. I've never made documents with more than one
author, so I've never thought about this scenario. For a moment I
thought org supported more than one author (explicitly, I mean).

Anyway, \and is just a formatting command: add a space between two
authors. Some people may prefer to put a line break \\ or anything else.
Of course, \and (and any other format command) will have a negative
effect on the pdfauthor metadata, which only collects text strings. It
is a similar problem to the one with footnotes, which Maxim commented
on. I think the basic problem is that org uses #+author, #+title, etc.
as a single source for both the metadata strings and the exported
format, i.e. the title, the author, the date that is printed somewhere.

Perhaps the ideal would be to distinguish in some way between
author-metadata and author-exported-format. For example something like:

#+AUTHOR[John Doe and Luke Skywalker]: John Doe @@latex:\and@@ Luke
Skywalker

The optional string in square brackets would be the metadata; the rest
would be the direct exported format. If there is no optional string, the
value is used for both metadata and format. Could this be also a
possible solution to the footnote problem?

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

-- 
Juan Manuel Macías -- Composición tipográfica, tratamiento de datos, diseño editorial y ortotipografía

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Ihor Radchenko]

Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

> ... I think the basic problem is that org uses #+author, #+title, etc.
> as a single source for both the metadata strings and the exported
> format, i.e. the title, the author, the date that is printed somewhere.
>
> Perhaps the ideal would be to distinguish in some way between
> author-metadata and author-exported-format. For example something like:
>
> #+AUTHOR[John Doe and Luke Skywalker]: John Doe @@latex:\and@@ Luke
> Skywalker
>
> The optional string in square brackets would be the metadata; the rest
> would be the direct exported format. If there is no optional string, the
> value is used for both metadata and format. Could this be also a
> possible solution to the footnote problem?

Another option is to have a new set of keywords:
#+LATEX_AUTHOR: <author with formatting goes here>
#+HTML_AUTHOR: ...

For multiple authors, we may introduce something like

#+AUTHOR: John Doe
#+AUTHOR+: Luke Skywalker

That should be fully backwards-compatible.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Max Nikulin]

On 04/02/2024 22:21, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> 
> Another option is to have a new set of keywords:
> #+LATEX_AUTHOR: <author with formatting goes here>
> #+HTML_AUTHOR: ...
> 
> For multiple authors, we may introduce something like
> 
> #+AUTHOR: John Doe
> #+AUTHOR+: Luke Skywalker

Another idea:

#+metadata:
- author ::
   - John Doe
   - Luke Skywalker
- title :: Some text

With overrides for specific backends

#+metadata: :backend latex
- author :: ....

Perhaps backends may declare if they support footnotes, etc. by defining 
some backend property.

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Max Nikulin writes:

> On 04/02/2024 22:21, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
>> 
>> Another option is to have a new set of keywords:
>> #+LATEX_AUTHOR: <author with formatting goes here>
>> #+HTML_AUTHOR: ...
>> 
>> For multiple authors, we may introduce something like
>> 
>> #+AUTHOR: John Doe
>> #+AUTHOR+: Luke Skywalker
>
> Another idea:
>
> #+metadata:
> - author ::
>    - John Doe
>    - Luke Skywalker
> - title :: Some text
>
> With overrides for specific backends
>
> #+metadata: :backend latex
> - author :: ....
>
> Perhaps backends may declare if they support footnotes, etc. by defining 
> some backend property.

I like both ideas. If I had to choose, perhaps I would prefer Ihor's
approach since it separates the formatting value and the metadata value
using simple keywords. I understand that in the former you could add any
direct format (LaTeX, odt, html...), macros and even footnotes. And if
the former is not explicitly included in the document, then the latter
is used to populate both the formatting value and the metadata value.

Anyway, I think your approach would work very well for more complex pdf
metadata like xmp. Maybe using the hyperxmp package, which you mentioned
in a thread months ago?

Maybe something like this:

#+latex_xmp
...
#+end

?

Best regards,

Juan Manuel 

Re: Exporting multiple #+AUTHOR keywords

[Ihor Radchenko]

Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:

>>  Another option is to have a new set of keywords:
>>  #+LATEX_AUTHOR: <author with formatting goes here>
>>  #+HTML_AUTHOR: ...
> ...
> Another idea:
>
> #+metadata:
> - author ::
>    - John Doe
>    - Luke Skywalker
> - title :: Some text
>
> With overrides for specific backends

This implies that #+AUTHOR may contain markup, while #+metadata should
not; as opposed to my idea with #+AUTHOR being reserved to "plain"
author and #+BACKEND_AUTHOR defining more specific markup.

I feel that my approach is slightly better because you can have
different author markup for different backends when using my suggestion.

> Perhaps backends may declare if they support footnotes, etc. by defining 
> some backend property.

The comment about footnotes belongs to parent thread, not to this
branch.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>