Hi Amin,

> What do you (other folks also) think?

A while ago Nicolas forwarded me an email between him and Laszlo on this. Here
are my thoughts at the time addresses to Laszlo (which haven’t changed much since):

Nicolas <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> IIUC, merge is only viable if “ox-slimhtml” is a drop-in replacement for
> “ox-html”. Otherwise, users will miss out many features. Of course, we
> could ship two competing HTML export back-ends, but I don’t think that’s
> a good idea either.
>
> So, it is meant for inclusion in Org proper, or as a GNU ELPA package?
> I don’t know. Maybe Timothy has a clearer view about it.

I believe I see your motivation in creating ox-slimhtml, as the current
ox-html includes much more than could be considered strictly necessary.

However, like Nicolas I am hesitant to put this straight into Org along
side ox-html. My personal view is that ideally ox-html would be equipped
with the relevant knobs and levers (metaphorically speaking) such that
one could obtain the same result as ox-slimhtml, the current result, or
something in-between. I’ve felt for some time that ox-html could benefit
from a bit more in-built flexibility without going down the path of
hooks, filters, and advice. This would certainly be more effort, so I
completely understand if this isn’t something you’d like to undertake.
In that case, I feel that this may be best suited as an ELPA package —
closely in reach for those who are looking for a slimmer ox-html.

All the best,
Timothy