From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: New exporter, beamer confusion Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:32:22 +0100 Message-ID: <87y5f1lj1l.fsf@pank.eu> References: <20130204063905.GA23614@kuru.dyndns-at-home.com> <87wqun5037.fsf@gmail.com> <6207.1360048864@alphaville> <87fw1ashw5.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55505) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U34BB-0006JJ-O2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 07:32:46 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U34B6-00054Z-VD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 07:32:45 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:56037) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U34B6-00054I-OZ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 07:32:40 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U34BO-0003fQ-4U for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:32:58 +0100 Received: from 192.167.90.131 ([192.167.90.131]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:32:58 +0100 Received: from rasmus by 192.167.90.131 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:32:58 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org James Harkins writes: > Btw, *who* preferred \alert? (Orwell, Politics and the English Language: > "Never use the passive [voice] where you can use the active.") I prefer alert. See the Beamer manual (texdoc beamer in texlive) on change of style and how to use alert (e.g. alert on one particular (sub)slide of a "multipage slide"). It's the Beamer way. Surely it cannot be a bad thing? > Still, I wonder if there is a way to make the new backend less unfriendly > toward lists. It's an interesting philosophical question: In what cases is > it better for the tool to adapt to the users' wishes, versus cases where > the tool should encourage (Are blocks in the result actually better than > lists? Who says so, and why should I take his or her word for it?) Org has many dedicated list symbols namely white space and one of {[-+*], [0-9][.)]}. Why should a headline be converted to a list? It was always awkward to me. I don't know how hard it would be to make the "default" block (of level 3, say) a list block, but I guess that's ultimately what you want? Such a behavior shouldn't be the default, IMO, since a headline is not a list. > "Reasonably" for me would mean tweaking some configuration options and > perhaps changing a few minor details of the markup. If you have to change > the org document's structure (e.g., converting headlines to lists), it > isn't backward compatible. I'm sure it would be relatively quick to hack together a couple of regexps and some lisp to do the conversion if you prefer to use the new exporter. E.g. find every occurrence of * in the beginning of the line of length X and convert each occurrence to "-" with appropriate white space (e.g. X + N). What might be useful would be a tag telling Org to use the legacy exporter on a file basis, although it would also be a short run solution. –Rasmus -- Summon the Mothership!