From: Morten L. J. <mor...@if...> - 2005-01-11 12:35:57
|
I have at the top of my RST source the following bibliographic fields: :Author: Morten Lied Johansen :Contact: mor...@if... :Date: $Date: 2005-01-11 02:21:42 +0100 (Tue, 11 Jan 2005) $ When I use rst2latex.py, I need to specifiy --use-latex-docinfo to get my name on the titlepage where it belongs. The problem is that latex picks up Author and Date, but not Contact, which leaves a single line on the first page after the titlepage where it simply says: Contact: mor...@if... This looks out-of-place, as the context in which it was placed has been removed (moved to the titlepage). Are there any solutions for this other than removing the field itself and including the email in the authors field? -- Morten My computer said that "Insert disk #3" but I couldn't get more than one disk fit in at a time! |
From: Alan G I. <ai...@am...> - 2005-01-11 20:44:01
|
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005, Morten Lied Johansen apparently wrote: > I have at the top of my RST source the following bibliographic fields: > :Author: Morten Lied Johansen > :Contact: mor...@if... > :Date: $Date: 2005-01-11 02:21:42 +0100 (Tue, 11 Jan 2005) $ > When I use rst2latex.py, I need to specifiy --use-latex-docinfo to get > my name on the titlepage where it belongs. The problem is that latex > picks up Author and Date, but not Contact Might the author field deserve certain subfields? Contact info is one example, position is another. These are attributes of the author, not of the document. Related to this, it seems useful to be able to create an author element for each author, rather than having to list them as Authors. fwiw, Alan Isaac |
From: Morten L. J. <mor...@if...> - 2005-01-11 22:31:38
|
Beni Cherniavsky wrote: > Morten Lied Johansen wrote: [snip] >> This looks out-of-place, as the context in which it was placed has >> been removed (moved to the titlepage). Are there any solutions for >> this other than removing the field itself and including the email >> in the authors field? >> > Oh, that's easy. The LaTeX writer should be fixed to place the > contact info into the titlepage as well. I'm writing a patch. What > is the best way to format it? info latex gives: > > The `\author' command declares the author(s), where `names' is a list > of authors separated by `\and' commands. Use `\\' to separate lines > within a single author's entry - for example, to give the author's > institution or address. > > So, should I simply format this:: > > :Author: Foo :Contact: fo...@ex... :Author: Bar :Contact: > ba...@ex... > > as:: > > \author{foo \\ fo...@ex... \and bar \\ ba...@ex...} > > ? Seems like a good solution to me, maybe place the email inside <> or () as that seems to be a common way of formatting it. > Are there any more fields that should be placed on the titlepage? > Organization seems like one. Address - if given, should probably go > with the author as well. Alan mentions this in another mail. There is a lot of information that is associate to the Author more than it is general to the document, so maybe there should be a way to associate the various fields somehow. > BTW, there is no way presently to associate contact, address and > other fields with particular authors. It seems that just attaching > to the last seen author is simplest. What if something like this is > given:: > > :Contact: qu...@ex... > :Author: Foo > :Author: Bar > > What does it mean? How should it be formatted? Not a clue... I think this would need a more complex handling of the bibliographic fields for it to always make sense. Until that happens, there will be lots and lots of ambigious examples. -- Morten |
From: Beni C. <cb...@us...> - 2005-01-15 22:12:40
|
Morten Lied Johansen wrote: > Beni Cherniavsky wrote: > >> Oh, that's easy. The LaTeX writer should be fixed to place the >> contact info into the titlepage as well. I'm writing a patch. What >> is the best way to format it? info latex gives: >> >> The `\author' command declares the author(s), where `names' is a list >> of authors separated by `\and' commands. Use `\\' to separate lines >> within a single author's entry - for example, to give the author's >> institution or address. >> >> So, should I simply format this:: >> >> :Author: Foo >> :Contact: fo...@ex... >> :Author: Bar >> :Contact: ba...@ex... >> >> as:: >> >> \author{foo \\ fo...@ex... \and bar \\ ba...@ex...} >> >> ? Implemented in CVS for organization,contact,address. Try it out. > Seems like a good solution to me, maybe place the email inside <> or () > as that seems to be a common way of formatting it. A contact is not always an email (it could be a phone number). And I'm not sure how well it will look combined with an organization and an address (which both probably shouldn't have any markers like <>). So I didn't add any such markers. Easy to implement if there is concensus. > Alan mentions this in another mail. There is a lot of information that > is associate to the Author more than it is general to the document, so > maybe there should be a way to associate the various fields somehow. > Probably but I can't think of a convenient syntax. Alternating author/contact/organization/address fields will do for now. -- Beni Cherniavsky <cb...@us...>, who can only read email on weekends. |
From: Alan G I. <ai...@am...> - 2005-01-17 17:21:24
|
On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Beni Cherniavsky apparently wrote: >> There is a lot of information that >> is associate to the Author more than it is general to the document, so >> maybe there should be a way to associate the various fields somehow. > Probably but I can't think of a convenient syntax. Alternating > author/contact/organization/address fields will do for now. And possibly 'position'? Cheers, Alan Isaac |