Re: syntax for blocks that the exporter should not render?

[Matt Price <moptop99@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Carsten Dominik
<carsten.dominik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:43 PM, Suvayu Ali <fatkasuvayu+linux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Carsten,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sep 5, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> #+/home/matt/Matt_headshots/Matt Price/IMG_9367_.jpg
>>>>>> http://2013.hackinghistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/wpid-IMG_9367_2.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this is the right behavior, such lines should not be rendered.
>>>>> Suvayu is right, with a space after the # they are treated as commendt, but I think
>>>>> they should also be ignored with the plus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicolas, what is the reasoning behind rendering them?
>>>>
>>>> Because this isn't valid Org syntax, so it is treated as regular text
>>>> (i.e. a paragraph). Something similar happens for unbalanced blocks:
>>>
>>> So in a way this is a "syntax error" message. :)
>>>
>>> OK, I get that point.  Is that behaviour documented?
>>
>> I think it is more of a "I don't recognise this as special syntax; it
>> must be text".  In that case, I'm not sure what can be documented, one
>> can have infinitely many text blurbs which look very similar to valid
>> Org syntax but isn't.
>>
>> I have noticed quite a few posts on the list with this kind of
>> misunderstanding.  I think the confusion arises from thinking of special
>> keywords like "#+options:", "#+attr_latex:", etc as comments.  AFAIU,
>> they are not.  Lines starting with "#+" are possible keywords, whereas
>> lines starting with "# " are comments.

(sorry, posted my last msg before I saw the more recent contributions)
So how would you suggest org2blog keep track of the relationship
between local and uploaded files?
Should it define a new keyword (perhaps" #+remote:" )?  And if so how
is that best done? Quickly looking at "Export Options (12.2) in the
manual I don't see a built-in mechanism for defining backend-specific
options.  Something like "#+ATTR_BLOG: remote" might do the trick, but
adding multiple links to such a line would be cumbersome, wouldn't it?

Thanks again for your help clarifying this.