Re: `:export' attribute?: Re: Experimental public branch for inline special blocks

["Juan Manuel Macías" <maciaschain@posteo.net>]

Max Nikulin writes:

> Your example uses a closed list of backends while "not (html or
> latex)" may be applicable to ascii, rst, some wiki dialects, etc.

Makes sense.

> Backend-specific markup may be more complex and content of fallback
> option may be different from text used in export snippets. Perhaps I
> shouldn't give so simple example.

I think I have understood the essentials, but perhaps it would be good
to see a slightly more complex scenario.

> Side note: I expect that the new object will be more convenient than
> export snippets in most cases.

I think so. In any case, although this object is proving pleasantly
versatile for us, I think we should not lose sight of the fact that its
main purpose is to be an inline text container with export properties.
Exports snippets are more for literal code inclusion. There can be
border uses between both objects, as there can also be with macros and
links. I suppose the ideal is to always choose the feature that best
suits a given context. One can put, for example @esindex[:export
latex+]{some word}, but in this case it would be more comfortable to put
@@latex:\esindex{some word}@@ or even use a macro.

>> :export "latex+ html+ rest*"
>
> "rest" might be a valid backend name.

I will try to implement the "rest" option.

-- 
Juan Manuel Macías -- Composición tipográfica, tratamiento de datos, diseño editorial y ortotipografía