[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [O] [ANN] Merge export-block type within special-block

From: Nicolas Goaziou
Subject: Re: [O] [ANN] Merge export-block type within special-block
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 09:26:55 +0200


Aaron Ecay <address@hidden> writes:

> I have a hunch that this is backwards.  It seems like the convention
> has been to allow arbitrary special blocks in org files.  Sticking to
> what I know best, these create arbitrarily-named environments in Latex.
> Export blocks seem like the special case (e.g. the number of types is
> constrained by the available export modules), and so they should have
> to bear special marking.

Historically (i.e. pre-8.0), so-called export blocks were a core
feature, whereas special blocks were defined in an optional library
(IIRC "org-special-blocks.el"). That explains why my proposal was to
optionally activate special blocks and not the other way round.

We can instead use

  #+begin_latex :raw t

to optionally activate an export block instead of a special block.
I don't mind either way.

> What if you used the convention that all export blocks had the form
> #+begin_export_latex, #+begin_export_html, etc.?  This should be
> unambiguous to parse.  (It’s possible to bikeshed about the name, of
> course: perhaps #+begin_literal_latex etc.)

One drawback, however, is that is prevents any special block name from
starting with "export" (or any post-bikeshedding name that could be


Nicolas Goaziou

reply via email to

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