emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Orgmode] problem with mime conversion for emails


From: Eric Schulte
Subject: Re: [Orgmode] problem with mime conversion for emails
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2010 14:52:10 -0600
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Hi Eric,

An easy fix may be using the `org-mime-html-hook' to post-process the
html, the following (untested) should be sufficient.

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(add-hook 'org-mime-html-hook
          (lambda ()
            (replace-regexp
             (regexp-quote "<span style=\"visibility:hidden;\">X</span>")
             "&nbsp;")))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

To me, this seems easier than having an email-specific export target.

Best -- Eric

Eric S Fraga <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I am hoping somebody can suggest a workaround for a simple problem
> with org-mime.  Specifically, I am in charge of a project in which I
> need to email around a to do list with checkboxes.  I have been using
> PDF export for this and this works perfectly fine.  However, given the
> existence of org-mime, I thought this would remove a step from those
> reading my emails.
>
> The problem is that the HTML conversion for checkbox lists uses the 
> construct
>
> : <span style="visibility:hidden;">X</span>
>
> (generated on line 1765 of org-html.el) to fill in the checkboxes for
> items *not* done.  Unfortunately, the visibility attribute is ignored
> by some email readers, with /Gmail/ being one of the prominent guilty
> ones.  This makes my todo lists look like everything is already done
> and we can all go home early!  How I wish this were true... ;-)
>
> The whole reason for the use of the visibility attribute, I assume, is
> to line entries up.
>
> I am happy to do some post-processing on the HTML output but I think a
> better solution may be to do this export differently.  Does anybody
> have any suggestions?  Would replacing the X in the above with &nbsp;
> be good enough?
>
> Thanks,
> eric



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]