org-publish future ?

org-publish future ?

[Xavier Maillard]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 718 bytes --]

Hi,

I was looking on emacswiki searching for publish engines for Emacs.
Actually, I have found at least three of them:

1. muse
2. emacs-wiki
3. bhl

Adding org-publish to this list, we got 4 engines that do merely the same
thing except for org-publish which offers less features. So what is the
current goal for org-publish exactly ? Is there any possiblity that
org-publish be incorporated into something bigger and more insteresting for
us as end users. are there any plans for orc-publish if at all ?

I know David is quite busy with all his projects but I would like to know if
it is worth I learn org-publish in depth or switch to something else. So
David, what are your plans ? :)

Regards
-- 
Xavier Maillard

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 773 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 149 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: org-publish future ?

[Carsten Dominik]

What I like about org-publish is that it is general, and really 
focusses on the essentials of just the publishing process, without 
intermingling these issues with the formatting issues.  I believe you 
could publish muse files and bhdl files with org-publish, by just 
calling the appropriate functions or if necessary write a trivial 
wrapper around them.  Maybe you could also publish Org-mode files with 
Muse, I am not sure.

I myself don't see Org-mode primarily as a publishing tool at all.  The 
motivation for writing Org-mode was twofold:

- to get to a handle on the many things I need to do
- to collect all ideas that I had for writing plain text notes
   in Emacs into a single mode.  For me, Org-mode is vastly more
   convenient to use that any other text mode I know of.

David's org-publish gave me a one-key way to get these files on a 
webpage, something I use mostly internally to share notes with 
collaborators.  Importantly, I can let it take care of also updating 
any additional files like source code that might have changed and need 
updating.  That is exactly what I need.

About future development: I really like how basic and straight 
org-publish is.  No need to create another monster.  Maybe add a few 
more general publishing-functions (right now there are only two: 
org-to-html, and a plain copy for attachments) to save some users from 
writing their own.  But the basic setup looks fine and complete to me.

- Carsten


On Jun 5, 2006, at 22:03, Xavier Maillard wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I was looking on emacswiki searching for publish engines for Emacs. 
> Actually, I have found at least three of them:
>
> 1. muse
> 2. emacs-wiki
> 3. bhl
>
> Adding org-publish to this list, we got 4 engines that do merely the 
> same thing except for org-publish which offers less features. So what 
> is the current goal for org-publish exactly ? Is there any possiblity 
> that org-publish be incorporated into something bigger and more 
> insteresting for us as end users. are there any plans for orc-publish 
> if at all ?
>
> I know David is quite busy with all his projects but I would like to 
> know if it is worth I learn org-publish in depth or switch to 
> something else. So David, what are your plans ? :)
>
> Regards
> -- 

Re: org-publish future ?

[Michael Olson]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1055 bytes --]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> What I like about org-publish is that it is general, and really
> focusses on the essentials of just the publishing process, without
> intermingling these issues with the formatting issues.  I believe you
> could publish muse files and bhdl files with org-publish, by just
> calling the appropriate functions or if necessary write a trivial
> wrapper around them.  Maybe you could also publish Org-mode files with
> Muse, I am not sure.

Currently it isn't possible to publish Org files with Muse.  It will
be one of the goals for the next+1 release of Muse, however.  A very
optimistic estimate for this functionality would be October 2006.  A
more practical estimate would be December 2006.

-- 
Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 -- http://www.mwolson.org/
Interests: Emacs Lisp, text markup, protocols -- Jabber: mwolson_at_hcoop.net
  /` |\ | | | IRC: mwolson on freenode.net: #hcoop, #muse, #PurdueLUG
 |_] | \| |_| Project involvement: Emacs, Muse, Planner, ERC, EMMS

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 149 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Re: org-publish future ?

[Carsten Dominik]

On Jun 6, 2006, at 15:57, Michael Olson wrote:
>
> Currently it isn't possible to publish Org files with Muse.  It will
> be one of the goals for the next+1 release of Muse, however.  A very
> optimistic estimate for this functionality would be October 2006.  A
> more practical estimate would be December 2006.

I will be very curious to see this exporter, would certainly be nice.

However, what I really meant is if Muse can publish Org-mode files 
using the Org-mode HTML generator.

- Carsten


>
> -- 
> Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 -- http://www.mwolson.org/
> Interests: Emacs Lisp, text markup, protocols -- Jabber: 
> mwolson_at_hcoop.net
>   /` |\ | | | IRC: mwolson on freenode.net: #hcoop, #muse, #PurdueLUG
>  |_] | \| |_| Project involvement: Emacs, Muse, Planner, ERC, EMMS
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>

--
Carsten Dominik
Sterrenkundig Instituut "Anton Pannekoek"
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Kruislaan 403
NL-1098SJ Amsterdam
phone: +31 20 525 7477

Re: Re: org-publish future ?

[Michael Olson]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 700 bytes --]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> I will be very curious to see this exporter, would certainly be nice.
>
> However, what I really meant is if Muse can publish Org-mode files
> using the Org-mode HTML generator.

Oh.  Sorry for the confusion.  That currently can't be done, but I'm
going to try to make it possible before this current release, as a
"future-proofing" measure.

-- 
Michael Olson -- FSF Associate Member #652 -- http://www.mwolson.org/
Interests: Emacs Lisp, text markup, protocols -- Jabber: mwolson_at_hcoop.net
  /` |\ | | | IRC: mwolson on freenode.net: #hcoop, #muse, #PurdueLUG
 |_] | \| |_| Project involvement: Emacs, Muse, Planner, ERC, EMMS

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 190 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 149 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: org-publish future ?

[Bastien]

"Xavier Maillard" <zedek@gnu.org> writes:

> I was looking on emacswiki searching for publish engines for
> Emacs. Actually, I have found at least three of them: 
>
> 1. muse
> 2. emacs-wiki
> 3. bhl

Since you mentionned BHL, let me talk a bit about it.

BHL is quite *old* and buggy - it was my first elisp attempt and it
grew up into something too complicated.  Additionnally, BHL support
for the Wiki behavior is not as good as muse's one, so i would only
recommand to use BHL for single document.  And since BHL is a tool for
*exporting* files (not publishing them), this wiki behavior isn't
necessary anymore.

In a (no so) near future, i plan to rewrite BHL so it concentrates on
some functionnalities that are not muse priorities.  For instance, i'd
like BHL to implement a way of inserting readable bibtex references
(working with reftex), indexes and footnotes.  BHL should also remain
a tool for creating human-readable files, excluding any form of
explicit markup.

-- 
Bastien