Re: [patch] ox-koma-letter

[Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>]

Michael Strey <mstrey@strey.biz> writes:> Rasmus,


>> In fact to use the scrlttr2 support in Org I had to adjust a LCO files
>> because it's currently loaded after LATEX_HEADER arguments (so all
>> customization was overwritten).  I didn't like that.
>
> After this remark I checked my changes and compared them with the
> default code and behaviour of ox-koma-letter with the result that I
> reverted all of my deletions.  The mentioned feature provides just the right
> hierarchy for my use case.
>
>     - LCO overrides everything
>     - options in the file override options in customization
>     - options in customization override defaults in ox-koma-letter
>
> Nevertheless I agree that the "nil check" solution would allow more
> flexibility.


Cool, I'll look at it when time permits (which will not be next
week).

>> > Maybe we should write a user guide *before* further implementation
>> > steps.
>> 
>> I agree.  A "question zero" is whether we eventually want to have an
>> org-letter which could, in principle, output to something different
>> than scrlttr2.
>
> IMO one *good* solution for writing letters is enough.  scrlttr2 is
> perfect for me and covers at least European conventions about how
> letters should look like.  I don't know which LaTeX classes people from
> other parts of the globe prefer.
>
> At least we should try to make the user interface (the list of
> variables) universal enough to cover other classes as well.

I agree on semi-universal arguments and retaining the current
specialization to scrlttr2.

  


-- 
m-mm-mmm-mmmm bacon!