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 12:02:40 -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=49985 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pfxuu-0000py-7N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:03:26 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfxuq-0001Cs-Rp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:03:21 -0500 Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com ([209.85.161.41]:37745) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pfxuq-0001Co-LF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:03:20 -0500 Received: by fxm12 with SMTP id 12so835572fxm.0 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2011 09:03:19 -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 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. Please see the manual as an example. Now, I'm no fan of nerfing choices in order to force anyone to do things "The Right Way (tm)", but it bears mentioning. I see no harm in publishing using org-publish-org-to-org with htmlize. We could even add a link in the footer or header of each page that links to the htmlized source. I do *not* agree in making it the "default format" for any page. -- Jeffrey Horn http://www.failuretorefrain.com/jeff/