@JosephWright I guess we should put Catalan first in the language list if we are going for alphabetic order of english language names (or of language codes?)
@JosephWright well he is documenting them for the creation of own flags, so there are meant as public. But one wonder why they don't check other usages in such cases.
Ao utilizar o \begin{longtable} para criação de uma tabela, a minha lista de tabela não reconhece, apenas reconhece \begin{table}
%Inserir lista de tabelas
\pdfbookmark[0]{\listtablename}{lot}
\listoftables*
\cleardoublepage
Note from Paulo: I translated the question from Portuguese to English and did some retagging. Some rewording was done, but the general idea (and code) remains the same. You can still find the original question in the edit history.
When using the longtable environment to create a table, my list o...
@AlexG oh the tests are not really a problem, I can simply disable them, or accept that they fail. But everything that uses links fails too with the pdfmanagement. But I wrote now Akira, let's wait.
@UlrikeFischer Oh, then it is quite urgent to take some action. I ran some tests with the legacy hyperref and looked a bit into it's dvips driver backend. It doesn't seem affected. It only broke my pkgs :\.
@UlrikeFischer Btw, does AR/full Acrobat like BDC tags, whose associated dictionary is not inlined in the content stream, but is an indirect object that is mapped to and referenced by a /name?
@UlrikeFischer That's good. For OCGs (tag /OC) this is mandatory as the dict must be referencible by object number at other places. But I was unsure whether it is the case for accessibility-related tags too. In Ghostscript, for instance, the BDC pdfmark always creates an indirect object from the dict argument.
@AlexG it is not mandatory, I could get away with inline dictionaries--the first versions of tagpdf used them--but I implemented that as part of the general pdf code, and so tagpdf has it too.
@AlexG Reinhard Kotucha has already downgraded ghostscript, and Akira will look at the new sources and then it will be upgraded again.
@J.Power But they accept LaTeX submissions it seems: royalsociety.org/journals/authors/author-guidelines/#latex as long as you follow the general authors' guidelines I suppose. Most journals don't care about you formatting things in their final form. They just want something that minimizes their conversion if the paper is accepted.
@DavidCarlisle @J.Power They're very up to date too: "TeX files submitted must be generated using pdfTeX Version 3.1415926-2.4-1.40.13, TeXLive 2012 or earlier versions."
@UlrikeFischer Great! I wasn't sure whether the BDC pdfmark as implemented in Ghostscript also works the same way in Distiller. (It was me who contributed the BDC/EMC code to gs in 2014.)
@J.Power Just because someone created something to mimic their output doesn't mean that's what the journal wants you to submit. I would bet they don't.
@J.Power as far as I can see they are third party templates to make things look like the journal but if the journal is just going to take the tex source and re-set in using APP it doesn't matter much what the manuscript style is
@J.Power Overleaf "templates" are by no mean official for anything. Some, that are part of TeX Live and created by the relevant scientific bodies (IEEE, AMS, ACL, etc) are official, but many are not.
@J.Power using some complicated "template" just makes the job of the journal harder in fact as far as I can see supplying a non standard class file along with the article is not allowed according to teh submission guidelines
@DavidCarlisle @AlanMunn, you guys make valid and logical arguments. But, regarding the references, does it not make it easier if the sent manuscript has a standard references format?
@J.Power if they are not using tex for the final form al that is matters is that the manuscript is as simple as possible so they can strip out all the tex.
@J.Power Personally I don't care; in my field Author/Year citations are the norm, and as long a stuff is there I don't really care about the format. But yes from the journal point of view it makes sense to have some consistency of that kind of stuff, but that's a separate issue from the overall format of the article.
@J.Power ultimately it's the same answer for any submission, if the published guidelines for latex submission are not clear enough, just ask the journal to clarify, no point in asking random people on the internet to guess the rules.
@J.Power starting from the journal page leads to detailed latex instructions here it's clear they do not use tex at all and all the instructions are asking for very simple tex structure that they can convert clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/…
