From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com>
Subject: Re: MACRO and HTML escapes and migration to org-mode 8
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:47:11 +0200
Message-ID: <m28v4ya7yo.fsf@christianmoe.com>
References: <kgrbo9xtddz.fsf@smtp.gmail.com> <m27gklp3on.fsf@christianmoe.com>
	<CAD-6AA1971vSPtViB7Nu-H38n08s9hydwPvyzXQgstGiu2m_+A@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38498)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1UNhfe-00089M-G2
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 06:45:35 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1UNhfV-0001fc-QT
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 06:45:30 -0400
Received: from mail2.b1.hitrost.net ([91.185.211.205]:58578)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1UNhfV-0001fP-Ke
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2013 06:45:21 -0400
In-reply-to: <CAD-6AA1971vSPtViB7Nu-H38n08s9hydwPvyzXQgstGiu2m_+A@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Adrian Tritschler <ajft@ajft.org>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org


Adrian Tritschler writes:
>> #+MACRO: datetime @@html:<span class="datetime" title="$1">$2</span>@@
>
>
> Aha, and so it does.
>
> I thought I'd tried that prior to my posting, I know I tried a few
> variations, must have made some mistake along the way.

It'll take some time before I remember to indicate the backend after the
@@'s, but I generally like the new syntax much better.

Yours,
Christian