Re: [patch] ox-koma-letter

[Michael Strey <mstrey@strey.biz>]

Rasmus,

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 01:13:25PM +0100, Rasmus wrote:

[...]

> In fact to use the scrlttr2 support in Org I had to adjust a LCO files
> because it's currently loaded after LATEX_HEADER arguments (so all
> customization was overwritten).  I didn't like that.

After this remark I checked my changes and compared them with the
default code and behaviour of ox-koma-letter with the result that I
reverted all of my deletions.  The mentioned feature provides just the right
hierarchy for my use case.

    - LCO overrides everything
    - options in the file override options in customization
    - options in customization override defaults in ox-koma-letter

Nevertheless I agree that the "nil check" solution would allow more
flexibility.

[...]

> > Maybe we should write a user guide *before* further implementation
> > steps.
> 
> I agree.  A "question zero" is whether we eventually want to have an
> org-letter which could, in principle, output to something different
> than scrlttr2.

IMO one *good* solution for writing letters is enough.  scrlttr2 is
perfect for me and covers at least European conventions about how
letters should look like.  I don't know which LaTeX classes people from
other parts of the globe prefer.

At least we should try to make the user interface (the list of
variables) universal enough to cover other classes as well.


> Other things: 
> 
>   - Cleaning defaults
>   - Only insert KOMAVARs when non-nil.
>   - Which variables to include.  E.g. Michael's list vs. every
>     komavar.
>   - consider the order of KOMAVARs, e.g. do we really want
>     LATEX_HEADER before LCO-like stuff?  Do we want a KOMA_HEADER
>    (or LETTER_HEADER) which comes after LCO?
> 
> What to you think?

Good plan.  I will provide you with the last version of my modification
by PM and write a How To.

Best regards
-- 
Michael Strey 
www.strey.biz