From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sebastien Vauban Subject: Re: org-html-use-unicode-chars breaks source code blocks Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2015 21:32:04 +0200 Message-ID: <86r3nc2r7v.fsf@example.com> References: <871tfjq7mb.fsf@gmx.us> <87zj26gart.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87zj23h168.fsf@gmx.us> <87egjftmd4.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87614r2wow.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Andreas Leha writes: > [ deleted: discussion on beatification ] > >> My initial reaction was to kill it as well. But I might feel like this a >> bit to often (I feel the same way about headline keywords like COMMENT). > > There has been repeated 'bashing' of the COMMENT keyword lately on this > list. Let me just raise a voice in defence. I do not mind the syntax > too much, but the functionality of commenting a whole subtree without > loosing the outline functionality is really handy. Especially also in > distinction to the equally handy :noexport: tag. > > So, even if there is probably not a high risk for the COMMENT keyword to > be dropped I just wanted to express my support for it. +1 Both COMMENT and :noexport: are necessary, for achieving different tasks. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban