From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Horn Subject: Re: Re: Worg needs some reorganizing Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:50:18 -0500 Message-ID: References: <4CAD81B0.6090807@manor-farm.org> <87bp6ytacd.fsf_-_@stats.ox.ac.uk> <87fwsubckf.fsf@gnu.org> <87aaj2w5x4.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87d3nyuhkw.fsf@altern.org> <87aaj0kggo.fsf@gmail.com> <87zkr0load.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87pqrwipjd.fsf@gmail.com> <87oc7glhef.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87hbd8ins8.fsf@gmail.com> <87ipxolgji.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87aaj0iiff.fsf@gmail.com> <87r5cbk28p.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> <87fwsrtokh.fsf@gnu.org> <87lj2jouz7.fsf@fastmail.fm> <877he2fvw0.fsf@gnu.org> <87fwsqw8u3.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87d3nufa7a.fsf@gmail.com> <87r5cagi6h.fsf@riotblast.dunsmor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=51187 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pfyes-0005eR-Oj for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:50:56 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfyeq-0004Ja-11 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:50:54 -0500 Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com ([209.85.214.41]:63509) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfyep-0004Io-PU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:50:51 -0500 Received: by bwz16 with SMTP id 16so743021bwz.0 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:50:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Dan Davison Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Dan Davison wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Dan Davison wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Jeff Horn wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Dan Davison wrote: >>> > I strongly second this. In fact I'll stick my neck out more: Worg is >>> > great, but for tutorials on org-mode, HTML export is often the wrong >>> > format for obvious reasons (i.e. unless you go to some trouble, it >>> > conceals a lot of the org syntax). I'm tempted to suggest that htmlized >>> > output should be the default format for many org tutorials on Worg. >>> >>> I respectfully disagree with your assertion. When someone writes a >>> document "properly", i.e. in a literate fashion, i.e. using org source >>> blocks, the right syntax is shown at the right time. >> >> So I think we both have babel documents in mind -- i.e. ones with >> active code blocks. The trouble with using org source blocks to render >> the org syntax in HTML is that the content must be duplicated. I know >> from experience that it is easy to let the pedagogical org block get >> out of sync with its functional counterpart. > > Another possibility is that a new header arg (perhaps ":exports org") > could be added to babel, which would have the effect of wrapping the > block in an org src block on export. That's quite elegant. Certainly takes the tedium out of fixing already broken pages. -- Jeffrey Horn http://www.failuretorefrain.com/jeff/