markdown_github list issues #1137
Comments
|
You could try redefining the \itemsep1pt macro in your +++ Christian Zangl [Feb 03 14 02:38 ]:
|
|
Note also: there is a distinction in markdown btw "tight" and +++ Christian Zangl [Feb 03 14 02:38 ]:
|
Could you give me a hint on how I can do that? I am trying to remove the spacing between the lines so that it resembles the GFM used here. E.g.
In the pandoc pdf output it looks more like this:
Is there another variable that's controls this (besides \itemsep1pt\parskip0pt\parsep0pt)? |
|
If you don't put blank lines between your list items, they should appear tightly packed together in PDF output. Here's a screenshot of what I get from |
|
That's strange because I get a different output using
I've pushed the input/output here: https://gist.github.com/laktak/8799487 Do I need a special TeX/LaTeX? I am using this one: http://miktex.org |
|
Aha - it happens with This is evidently because of the |
|
Ah, OK. A fix would be greatly appreciated :) Is this also the cause for the other issue in the sample? FooBar
vs.
Test |
|
No, the other issue has to do with the fact that pandoc (even with +++ Christian Zangl [Feb 04 14 11:08 ]:
|
|
It would be great if you could fix both issues. I'd offer to help but my knowledge of Haskell is ~0. |
|
The list indentation issue is not likely to be fixed in the near +++ Christian Zangl [Feb 05 14 07:04 ]:
|
|
Well the content is already written so I guess I have to write a preprocessor to fix this ... however I'd welcome a common markdown standard too. |
|
+++ Christian Zangl [Feb 06 14 01:17 ]:
Working on that! |
|
+1 seeing this as well with GFM. I can just hack around it in the meantime. Thanks for all your awesome work on pandoc, @jgm! |
Closes #3511. Previously pandoc used the four-space rule: continuation paragraphs, sublists, and other block level content had to be indented 4 spaces. Now the indentation required is determined by the first line of the list item: to be included in the list item, blocks must be indented to the level of the first non-space content after the list marker. Exception: if are 5 or more spaces after the list marker, then the content is interpreted as an indented code block, and continuation paragraphs must be indented two spaces beyond the end of the list marker. See the CommonMark spec for more details and examples. Documents that adhere to the four-space rule should, in most cases, be parsed the same way by the new rules. Here are some examples of texts that will be parsed differently: - a - b will be parsed as a list item with a sublist; under the four-space rule, it would be a list with two items. - a code Here we have an indented code block under the list item, even though it is only indented six spaces from the margin, because it is four spaces past the point where a continuation paragraph could begin. With the four-space rule, this would be a regular paragraph rather than a code block. - a code Here the code block will start with two spaces, whereas under the four-space rule, it would start with `code`. With the four-space rule, indented code under a list item always must be indented eight spaces from the margin, while the new rules require only that it be indented four spaces from the beginning of the first non-space text after the list marker (here, `a`). This change was motivated by a slew of bug reports from people who expected lists to work differently (#3125, #2367, #2575, #2210, #1990, #1137, #744, #172, #137, #128) and by the growing prevalance of CommonMark (now used by GitHub, for example). Users who want to use the old rules can select the `four_space_rule` extension. * Added `four_space_rule` extension. * Added `Ext_four_space_rule` to `Extensions`. * `Parsing` now exports `gobbleAtMostSpaces`, and the type of `gobbleSpaces` has been changed so that a `ReaderOptions` parameter is not needed.
I am trying to define an itemsep in the latex template.
The output however will always contain
which overwrites my template (AFAIK - I'm no latex expert).
Is it possible to modify the itemsep1pt value?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: