[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday
From: |
Nicolas Richard |
Subject: |
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday |
Date: |
Sat, 09 Feb 2013 21:55:50 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.92 (gnu/linux) |
Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
> "Sean O'Halpin" <address@hidden> writes:
>> You would avoid having to add document level keywords such as
>> HTML_STYLE and MAN_CLASS_OPTIONS for new exporters. It would be the
>> back-end's responsibility to validate and document these options. My
>> suggestion is really not so different from what the new exporter does
>> anyway. Where we now have =#+HTML_LINK_UP: "..."=, I'm suggesting we
>> have =#+EXPORT: html link-up "..."=.
>
> Honestly, besides the syntax, I don't see any difference.
IIUC, the difference is that #+HTML_LINK_UP and friends are all direct
children of the document in the former case, and in the latter case all
exporter-related options are grouped. An intermediate solution would be
to group all options specific to one backend in #+EXPORT_<backend> (and
in this case, there could be a generic #+EXPORT: that could be used by
every backend). OTOH, most #+keywords statements are meant for the
exporter (there are exceptions) anyway, so this might sound like
premature or over-generalization.
I didn't read the whole thread and do not actually export very often so
might have completely missed the point.
--
Nico.
- Re: [O] org export Taskjuggler, (continued)
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday, Jay Kerns, 2013/02/06
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday, Sean O'Halpin, 2013/02/08
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday, Achim Gratz, 2013/02/09
Re: [O] [ANN] Merge of new export framework on Wednesday, Jambunathan K, 2013/02/09
Re: [O] compilation issues of new export framework, Achim Gratz, 2013/02/09