>>>
* TODO export options
:PROPERTIES:
:EXPORT_OPTIONS: p:nil
:END:
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08 Di.>
normal text
** TODO l1
:PROPERTIES:
:EXPORT_OPTIONS: p:t
:END:
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08 Di.>
normal text
*** TODO l2
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08 Di.>
normal text
**** TODO l3
:PROPERTIES:
:EXPORT_OPTIONS: p:nil
:END:
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08 Di.>
normal text
***** TODO l4
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08 Di.>
normal text
<<<

>>>
SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08>
normal text


TODO l1
=======

  SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08>
  normal text


TODO l2
~~~~~~~

  normal text


TODO l3
-------

  SCHEDULED: <2021-06-08>
  normal text


* TODO l4

  normal text
<<<

Am Di., 15. Juni 2021 um 08:07 Uhr schrieb Nicolas Goaziou <
mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>:

> Hello,
>
> Michael Dauer <mick.dauer@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I would understand that the export would take the export settings of the
> > current heading to control the export of the complete subtree.
>
> That's correct.
>
> > 1. The much better logic would be that each node determines e.g. the
> > with-planning by its own (or inherited) properties.
>
> This is not how it is implemented. Export options are per export
> process, not per node. Besides, the above would not make sense for
> one-off items, like title:nil.
>
> I guess the much better logic would first need to distinguish global
> from local export options. But I don't think this is worth the trouble.
>
> > 2. This actually works when the scheduled date is (incorrectly) placed
> > below the drawer. It is not just treated as the first paragraph, but
> > omitted when the with-planning property of its node is nil, while normal
> > text would be exported.
>
> Would you mind providing an ECM for it? I'm not sure what example you're
> referring to.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Nicolas Goaziou
>