Re: [O] [PATCH] Override the default class name with a new one.

[Nick Dokos]

Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:

> Feng Shu <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> #+LATEX_CLASS: article
>> #+LATEX_CLASS_NAME: ctexart
>
> I'm not sure this is the right approach. . .  I can certainly see the
> value of generating classes on the fly, though.  But somehow the
> proposed syntax just seems to counter-intuitive.  I'm not sure how to
> overcome this, but perhaps it would be better to allow for an argument
> to LATEX_CLASS, e.g.
>
> (*)   #+LATEX_CLASS: myclass :class-name ctexart.
>

That was what popped into my head as well - I didn't much care for the
OP's approach.  Now that I've thought about it some more, I'm not sure I
like this one much better...

> as e.g. the INCLUDE command.  Of course (*) is somewhat different from
> how stuff like this is usually handled, cf. e.g. LATEX_CLASS_OPTIONS.
>
...but this sounds a bit more promising: maybe LATEX_CLASS_OPTIONS can
be eliminated in favor of LATEX_CLASS with arguments:

#+LATEX_CLASS: key :class-name foo :class-options a4paper,12pt

where "key" selects from org-latex-classes (and is optional, default
"article"), class-name is optional and defaults to key (or article if
key is absent).

-- 
Nick