From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Price Subject: Re: feature request: best practices for speaker notes and incremental lists/elements Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:16:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ziz8zdyh.fsf@gmx.us> <87h9lgcwij.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fb20021b0ee0522d8b39e Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49595) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpxkV-0001pn-2P for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:16:39 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpxkU-0002hn-0Z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:16:38 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-x22c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22c]:34215) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZpxkT-0002hj-RZ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:16:37 -0400 Received: by iow1 with SMTP id 1so147434422iow.1 for ; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 05:16:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87h9lgcwij.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> 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: Org Mode --001a113fb20021b0ee0522d8b39e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > Hello, > > Rasmus writes: > > > Matt Price writes: > > > >> I think the two exporters should use the same syntax! I especially think > >> that any future exporters should use a single, unified syntax, and that > >> the older exporters should eventualyl be changed to support that new > >> syntax. And finally, I think the new syntax should be as simple as > >> humanly possible. So I'd like to suggest that the community decide on > >> the best way forward. > > > > We can try to make a common syntax across our exporter, namely ox-desk, > > ox-beamer and ox-s5 to the extend that these support "speaker notes". A > > "pull request" can then be made to ox-reveal.el, which AFAIK is neither > > part of lisp or contrib/lisp. > > Note that "common syntax" probably means less features (i.e., we are > limited to common features). > Yes, certainly -- there would doubtless still be a need for some backend-specific hacks, just not as many as we currently have. > > As suggested, I think, it seems better to create a generic export > back-end from scratch, which would allow to select a target (e.g., > beamer, reveal.js...), than altering current back-ends and enter > backward-compatibility's hell. > That does sound like a good idea. Can I ask, what syntactical structures seem best to you? > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas Goaziou > > --001a113fb20021b0ee0522d8b39e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Nicolas Goaziou <= mail@nicolasgoa= ziou.fr> wrote:
Hello,

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:
> Matt Price <moptop99@gmail.co= m> writes:
>
>> I think the two exporters should use the same syntax! I especially= think
>> that any future exporters should use a single, unified syntax, and= that
>> the older exporters should eventualyl be changed to support that n= ew
>> syntax.=C2=A0 And finally, I think the new syntax should be as sim= ple as
>> humanly possible.=C2=A0 So I'd like to suggest that the commun= ity decide on
>> the best way forward.
>
> We can try to make a common syntax across our exporter, namely ox-desk= ,
> ox-beamer and ox-s5 to the extend that these support "speaker not= es".=C2=A0 A
> "pull request" can then be made to ox-reveal.el, which AFAIK= is neither
> part of lisp or contrib/lisp.

Note that "common syntax" probably means less features (i.= e., we are
limited to common features).

Yes, certa= inly -- there would doubtless still be a need for some backend-specific hac= ks, just not as many as we currently have.=C2=A0

As suggested, I think, it seems better to create a generic export
back-end from scratch, which would allow to select a target (e.g.,
beamer, reveal.js...), than altering current back-ends and enter
backward-compatibility's hell.

That= does sound like a good idea. Can I ask, what syntactical structures seem b= est to you?=C2=A0

=C2=A0
Regards,

--
Nicolas Goaziou


--001a113fb20021b0ee0522d8b39e--