From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: Help on org-export-filter-link-functions Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:24:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87vbnym9xr.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87lhox2yf0.fsf@tanger.home> <87a95be2t3.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43529) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XauEp-0002Yk-B2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 18:25:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XauEi-0007Hb-Qb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 18:25:11 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:44273) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XauEi-0007D7-KO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Oct 2014 18:25:04 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XauEg-0006Dw-6y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:25:02 +0200 Received: from 109.201.154.143 ([109.201.154.143]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:25:02 +0200 Received: from rasmus by 109.201.154.143 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 00:25:02 +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 Hi John, John Kitchin writes: > hmmm... the sometimes makes me nervous. I found even for links, this > only works sometimes. That doesn't seem reliable to me. With headlines the case where it does not work is for verb-only headings. I guess that could occur more frequently with links, though I have never done anything serious with links. q > I think extending existing backends > (e.g. http://orgmode.org/manual/Advanced-configuration.html) is probably > more reliable for getting element properties, and approximately the same > amount of work. In practice derived classes could be a lot of work. There is also two hooks that run before processing, but you'd need to be able to solve the issue with org syntax. In practice this is not a limitation as you can use snippets for whatever backend. > I guess it just depends on how significantly you are modifying the > export, and what information you need to modify it. Filters are great > for simple wrapping and regexp based modifications. A derived backend is > better if you need reliable element properties, and a different format > than the default export. Yeah. –Rasmus -- I almost cut my hair, it happened just the other day