From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: Include does not work when doing org-export-as-org Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:57:58 -0400 Message-ID: <7523.1318345078@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> References: <20111011123829.GB17611@olymp.office.virtualminds.de> <6195.1318342189@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <6528.1318342888@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <6750.1318343276@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <20111011143414.GA25699@olymp.office.virtualminds.de> Reply-To: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:60437) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDdmQ-0008L4-Qd for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:58:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDdmM-00052O-Ck for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:58:06 -0400 Received: from g4t0014.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.17]:23952) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RDdmM-000512-3R for Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:58:02 -0400 Received: from g4t0009.houston.hp.com (g4t0009.houston.hp.com [16.234.32.26]) by g4t0014.houston.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 450112439D for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:58:00 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Message from Henry Hirsch of "Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:34:14 +0200." <20111011143414.GA25699@olymp.office.virtualminds.de> 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 Cc: nicholas.dokos@hp.com Henry Hirsch wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:27:56AM -0400, Nick Dokos wrote: > > > In particular, I assume it does not process includes, because they need > > to be preserved in examples. > > > > Nick > > So do you think it is reasonable that org-export-as-org is the only mode > of export which is exhibiting a different behaviour? > It's certainly reasonable: it does not pretend to be a general-purpose exporter. It may be misnamed though: if org-export-as-org is only used in batch processing of e.g. Worg, then it can be renamed to something more obscure and made non-interactive, so that it would not confuse the unwary. One could imagine a general-purpose org-export-as-org that processes includes, but I'm not sure what else it would do: just copy it's input to its output mostly - other than processing includes, is there anything else that it should do? > For my part I think it is not. I used to love org-mode above > everything. But this just leaves me not amused. > Well, there are a couple of options: o org is very much a scratch-your-itch project - so you can certainly go ahead and implement what you want. o explain your use case: if it is compelling enough, somebody might be motivated to implement what you ask for (but you need to specify it exactly - and if somebody else implements it, be prepared to compromise...) But it is certainly *not* the case that org is some ivory tower project that exists for theoretical purity only: there are hacks, work-arounds, inconsistencies and bugs. Nick