From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: latex checkboxes Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:52:45 -0400 Message-ID: <16191.1308264765@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> References: Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:60631) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXLQp-0001Cd-IJ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:53:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXLQo-00074q-AQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:52:59 -0400 Received: from vms173007pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.7]:33491) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QXLQn-00074d-UP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:52:58 -0400 Received: from alphaville.dokosmarshall.org ([unknown] [173.76.32.106]) by vms173007.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0LMW00C65NJXDO30@vms173007.mailsrvcs.net> for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:52:46 -0500 (CDT) In-reply-to: Message from Skip Collins of "Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:09:54 EDT." List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Skip Collins Cc: nicholas.dokos@hp.com, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Skip Collins wrote: > There is a couple of problems with the way checkboxes are typeset in LaTeX. > > - [ ] a > - [X] b > - [-] c > > is translated to the LaTeX > > \begin{itemize} > \item $\Box$ a > \item $\boxtimes$ b > \item $\boxminus$ c > \end{itemize} > > The first problem is that \Box is not the same size as \boxtimes or \boxminus . > The correct symbol to use from the amssymb package is \square which > matches the other two symbols. > > Another problem is that these symbols were intended to be mathematical > binary operators, and are therefore rather small for the purposes of a > checkbox. I suggest that LaTeX output could be modified to something > like: > > \setbox0=\hbox{\LARGE$\square$} > \begin{itemize} > \item {\parbox[][][c]{\wd0}{\LARGE$\square$}} a > \item {\parbox[][][c]{\wd0}{\LARGE$\boxtimes$}} b > \item {\parbox[][][c]{\wd0}{\LARGE$\boxminus$}} c > \end{itemize} > > The parbox ensures that the checkbox is nicely centered with the first > line of text. > > Another nice-to-have feature would be to use the checkbox as a label > for list items in non-enumerated lists. Currently, the list bullet > appears as visual clutter next to the checkbox. > I like it! Well, almost all of it: I'd vote for \large, rather than \LARGE, but otherwise it looks good to me. Also, the nice-to-have feature is very easy to implement. All it needs is a pair of square brackets around the box: ,---- | \item [{\parbox[][][c]{\wd0}{\LARGE$\square$}}] a `---- The \setbox can go into the preamble btw. Nick