From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: export options and exporting subtrees Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 08:39:27 +0800 Message-ID: <874mjpv7sw.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87a8tj689p.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <876145zn7m.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34317) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTfnX-0000lK-7g for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 20:39:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTfnU-0008BN-1j for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 20:39:39 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:42712) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTfnT-00089r-RD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 20:39:35 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTfnR-0000BH-DG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:39:33 +0200 Received: from 114.248.27.119 ([114.248.27.119]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:39:33 +0200 Received: from eric by 114.248.27.119 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 02:39:33 +0200 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@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Hello, > > Eric Abrahamsen writes: > >> I'm not sure why I've never noticed this issue before, but... >> >> Is it intentional that, when exporting a subtree, EXPORT_OPTIONS lines >> at the top of the file (or EXPORT_OPTIONS properties on parent >> headlines) are ignored? I have `org-use-property-inheritance' set to t. >> >> I'm not wrong that that's what happens, am I? I found this a bit >> surprising, but I guess I could understand why it might happen. Is it >> intentional? > > I don't see any reason to hard-code inheritance rules for "EXPORT_" > these properties. This is now fixed. Thank you. Thanks! This seems much more intuitive to me. E