I was wondering if macros could be used to output raw html code, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Namely: #+macro: bfoo @@html:
...
. This is quite a limitation. Is it the intended behavior? If the reason is that the macro could output text that needs the...
, then the problem is the point at which macros are expanded in the flow. An option would be to allow #+html: in the macro, but that doesn't work. The #+html: directive gets straight on the output. Sorry if this has already been discussed here. (I vaguely remember some discussions about recursive macros) Fabrice