From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Html export suggestion (use of
) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:40:07 +0100 Message-ID: <87odeynhx4.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <20071005215715.21604ade@newmanfamily.me.uk> <20071015230838.61f67e0a@newmanfamily.me.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii5Nr-0000GH-59 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:40:11 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii5Np-0000G5-QA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:40:10 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii5Np-0000G2-Ig for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:40:09 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.171]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ii5No-00047R-CP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:40:09 -0400 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so238805ugf for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 02:40:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Carsten Dominik's message of "Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:13:08 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Carsten, Carsten Dominik writes: > I now see why it can be useful to preserve the outline > structure in the HTML export, and if Bastien remains the > only voice against it, I will put these
s in. I didn't pronounced myself "against" it at all. I really like the idea of having
s in Org :) I only raised concerns about the fact that having
s will perhaps lead to a full templating system for the HTML output, and should be thought carefully (what structure? what classes? what ids?) Just for the record, here are the relevant parts of the (private) email I sent on this topic: ,---- | i don't want to jump into the « Dive-in-
-or-die » discussion, but | just to give you my very first impression on this: having
is nice | but you will surely end up trying to implement "templates" for the HTML | exporter. | | The choice for good class/id defaults might also be tricky: should a |
for a section have a class attribute like class="section" or an id | attribute like id="section1"? Org will of course chose the class="" | option, for the sake of both simplicity and genericity. But I can bet | you will soon be under pressure for more and more options... `---- Again: I'm not against
s, I'm just curious on how it could develop! -- Bastien