From: No Wayman <iarchivedmywholelife@gmail.com>
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [POLL] Naming of "export features"
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 10:06:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y1ooqu75.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.336.1676990100.5072.emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
> ⁃ Providing capabilities via snippets can be framed as akin to
> dynamically
> gaining a feature.
I understand some snippets may be used to, for example, include a
latex package.
However, it's not a requirement that a snippet "add a
feature/capability" to a document.
What that snippet does depends entirely on the context of the
export (a latex snippet will not "do" anything if inserted in an
HTML doc).
What if I want to add some metadata or a string like "Hi, Mom" in
the preamble of the document? Would it be reasonable to say the
document has had the "secret mom greeting" capability added, or is
that an overly complicated way of framing it?
Is the snippet required to have a side-effect on the document?
On the obverse, the snippets are always being added depending on
the context of the export.
`ox-contextual-snippets` is a much more concrete name than any of
the others proposed.
> Both components are crucial to the overall system, however if
> anything I view
> the latter as more important and so am not a fan of describing
> this system as
> “export contexts”.
How is the latter more important if it depends on the former?
As I mentioned off list, I think naming is only part of the
problem.
The design and API are currently over-engineered.
That should be discussed before worrying about the name.
next parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-23 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <mailman.336.1676990100.5072.emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
2023-02-23 15:06 ` No Wayman [this message]
2023-03-01 8:26 [POLL] Naming of "export features" Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez
2023-03-01 9:41 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-03-01 11:38 ` Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez
2023-03-02 11:30 ` Ihor Radchenko
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-02-10 17:20 [PATCH] Introduce " Timothy
2023-02-21 14:22 ` [POLL] Naming of " Timothy
2023-02-22 1:46 ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
2023-02-22 2:40 ` Timothy
2023-02-23 15:55 ` No Wayman
2023-02-23 16:17 ` No Wayman
2023-02-22 12:23 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-02-23 15:31 ` No Wayman
2023-02-23 16:04 ` Bruce D'Arcus
2023-02-23 19:04 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-02-23 19:55 ` Sébastien Miquel
2023-02-24 10:27 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-02-24 12:46 ` Sébastien Miquel
2023-02-24 13:03 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-02-24 21:38 ` Sébastien Miquel
2023-02-26 12:28 ` Ihor Radchenko
2023-02-26 14:06 ` Sébastien Miquel
2023-02-27 19:32 ` Ihor Radchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87y1ooqu75.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=iarchivedmywholelife@gmail.com \
--cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).