On Jun 29, 2007, at 11:34 PM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 30. Jun 2007, at 04:00, Charilaos Skiadas wrote:
Hey, welcome back Charilaos!
Thanks! Sorry for the lack of support this month, my absence from emails kind of happened along the way, I hadn't planned it at the beginning. I have to say though that it was the most relaxing thing I've done in a while ;).
[...]
Looking at this again, the current commands in the bundle use this:
${1/\\w+{(.*?)}|\(.)|(\w+)|([^\w\]+)/(?4:_:\L$1$2$3)/g}
which differs from the above only in the (\W+) part. So I am confused: Which cases are not covered by the already existing commands? I.e. what is the label, and how is it transformed in the two cases?
That’s because I did commit the new transformations, though had to make a minor change compared to what was discussed here.
As for the non-ascii characters, we could probably create a command that would scan the entire document and try to fix all the sectioning commands, including adding labels if there are none, and changing the labels appropriately.
If I understand correctly, they give a LaTeX compile error, if left there? In that case I think we should transform them to some dummy placeholder character (having to post-process the document sounds tedious).
That sounds reasonable, and underscore would do in that case. The main point of the command I was talking about would be to automatically add labels to an old document that, for whatever reason, did not have any labels for its sectioning commands. (I am currently working a lot with editing old/automatically created from word latex documents, and thinking of tools to make life easier with such files.). So the cleanup of existing labels would be just a side-effect.
When we can do recursive replacements (in the format string) we can add some humongous regexp to make it smarter with respect to the accents (i.e. effectively strip them, but in practice just handle all known accents).
That would indeed be nice!
Haris Skiadas