From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: [RFC] Draft mode Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2015 09:57:38 -0700 Message-ID: <87si5lqovx.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87io6w9p7y.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87io6vd7vl.fsf@gmx.us> <87r3l6jv55.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87oag95thw.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56667) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkEWA-0001gD-HD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 12:58:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkEVu-0001H1-Na for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 12:58:10 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:33300) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkEVu-0001Gi-HG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 12:57:54 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZkEVt-0000SG-B4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 18:57:53 +0200 Received: from 71-35-182-131.tukw.qwest.net ([71.35.182.131]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 18:57:53 +0200 Received: from eric by 71-35-182-131.tukw.qwest.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 08 Oct 2015 18:57:53 +0200 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 Thomas S. Dye writes: > Rasmus writes: > >>>> The interest of such functionality seems to be limited to people who >>>> maintain broken-but-soon-to-be-fixed documents... It does not seem to >>>> warrant prime real estate in the exporter IMO. Further, I don't think >>>> 'draft' is the correct word for this, but that's of course minor. >>> >>> I couldn't find anything better. Suggestions welcome. >> >> I agree. We already have the org-latex-classes, which a very different >> from latex-proper classes. This seems to cause a lot of confusion. >> Perhaps we can limit such overlap in the future. >> >> It’s a "relaxed" mode. I’m not sure what a good term for this is. > > Trial mode? Dry run?