org-export-generic.el and emphasize

org-export-generic.el and emphasize

[celano]

Hy,

I'm using org-export-generic.el to export my orgfile into wikipedia-like 
file.

I tried exporting a text with emphasize, but it doesn't work.
The man page speaks about sections, lists and such other things, but 
nothing about emphasizing and bold text.
http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/org-export-generic.html

Do you have any idea ?

Thank you
Celano

Re: Oorg-export-generic.el and emphasize

[Wes Hardaker]

celano <celano@laposte.net> writes:

> I tried exporting a text with emphasize, but it doesn't work.
> The man page speaks about sections, lists and such other things, but
> nothing about emphasizing and bold text.
> http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/org-export-generic.html

You're right that it doesn't do this.

The generic exporter really needs to be rewritten to make use of the new
parser, now that it exists...  I've been meaning to look into doing just
that but haven't yet found the time.
-- 
Wes Hardaker                                     
My Pictures:  http://capturedonearth.com/
My Thoughts:  http://pontifications.hardakers.net/

Re: Oorg-export-generic.el and emphasize

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Wes Hardaker <wjhns209@hardakers.net> writes:

> celano <celano@laposte.net> writes:
>
>> I tried exporting a text with emphasize, but it doesn't work.
>> The man page speaks about sections, lists and such other things, but
>> nothing about emphasizing and bold text.
>> http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/org-export-generic.html
>
> You're right that it doesn't do this.
>
> The generic exporter really needs to be rewritten to make use of the new
> parser, now that it exists...  I've been meaning to look into doing just
> that but haven't yet found the time.

"ox.el" is a generic exporter. I think we should focus on developing
export back-ends for this one instead.

What feature from `org-export-generic' do you think is missing in ox.el?


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou

Re: Oorg-export-generic.el and emphasize

[Wes Hardaker]

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> "ox.el" is a generic exporter. I think we should focus on developing
> export back-ends for this one instead.
>
> What feature from `org-export-generic' do you think is missing in
> ox.el?

ox.el is a wonderfully designed parser and exporter (from what I've read
of code, not actually used it (yet)).  And my kudos to that and the
suite of exporters that go with it!

org-export-generic had an entirely different audience in mind, though:
the non-programmer.  It was designed so that you didn't have to write a
function to make it work, and thus was less sophisticated in what it
could do.  However, with very little effort you could get the output of
your choice by simply adding strings to a list and off you go.

EG, the configuration was simply a list:

  ; ...
     :body-section-header-prefix  ("<h1>" "<h2>" "<h3>"
                                   "<h4>" "<h5>" "<h6>")
     :body-section-header-format  "%s"
     :body-section-header-suffix  ("</h1>\n" "</h2>\n" "</h3>\n"
                                   "</h4>\n" "</h5>\n" "</h6>\n")

     :body-text-prefix "<p>\n"
     :body-text-suffix "</p>\n"
  ; ...

So the goal was simply to define a list of tags that would be placed
before and after a section.  This meant you couldn't do anything
complex, but it was very simple to get something running without having
to write a single defun.

ox.el is different, and much more powerful.  You have to write a defun
in order to get it to work, but the defuns are generally simple in themselves.


What I'd like to have done is either:

  1) Rewrite the generic exporter to make use of the ox backend (write a
  function for each export requirement that looks up the appropriate
  symbol in the above looking assoc array) 

  2) Add similar functionality to ox itself so you could set either a
     function or a string within the org-export-define-backend call.
     Then the exporter could simply test if it was a simple string or a
     symbol and react appropriately.
-- 
Wes Hardaker                                     
My Pictures:  http://capturedonearth.com/
My Thoughts:  http://pontifications.hardakers.net/

Re: Oorg-export-generic.el and emphasize

[Bastien]

Wes Hardaker <wjhns209@hardakers.net> writes:

>> What feature from `org-export-generic' do you think is missing in
>> ox.el?
>
> ox.el is a wonderfully designed parser and exporter (from what I've read
> of code, not actually used it (yet)).  And my kudos to that and the
> suite of exporters that go with it!
>
> org-export-generic had an entirely different audience in mind, though:
> the non-programmer.

And this is *very* important IMHO.

Maybe we could write an interactive exporter generator based on ox.el?

Something with simple questions that will write the new ox-xxx.el file
itself, with no fiddling from the user.  Not immediately, at least.

On my todo list, but I'd be glad if someones beats me on this one :)

-- 
 Bastien

Re: Oorg-export-generic.el and emphasize

[Wes Hardaker]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Maybe we could write an interactive exporter generator based on ox.el?
>
> Something with simple questions that will write the new ox-xxx.el file
> itself, with no fiddling from the user.  Not immediately, at least.

That'd be cool too, but why not do it via late binding so that the user
doesn't even have to know code is being generated (at startup)?  Or why
not allow the ox.el code to accept a format string instead of a
function?

-- 
Wes Hardaker                                     
My Pictures:  http://capturedonearth.com/
My Thoughts:  http://pontifications.hardakers.net/