Re: [David O'Toole] Fwd: Re: org-publish future ?

[David O'Toole <dto@gnu.org>]

I tend to agree... I wasn't that hot about this possibility myself,
but thought it would be prudent to ask. 

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> On Jun 5, 2006, at 23:19, David O'Toole wrote:
>>
>> On a related note, Carsten are you reading? Something came up in IRC
>> discussion, about making it easier to convert org documents to other
>> formats. Although I am a bit resistant to the idea, especially since
>> it would take things in a more muse-ish direction, I remember you had
>> mentioned making a "cleaned up" publishing function that produces an
>> intermediate format (s-expressions?) that could be transformed into
>> something else. Are you still thinking about this?
>
> My interest in exporting Org-mode to more formats is quite limited.  I
> am not using Org-mode to write books.  And if I want to produce a
> book, moving away from the fantastic toolset for LaTeX available under
> Emacs to something that limits my possibilities to a subset of LaTeX
> is a loss, not a gain.
>
> Personally, I am not often in a situation where I need to produce many
> different output formats of a document.  The only major application
> for this is documentation, for example of computer programs produce
> documentation.  There are many systems that can do this, for example
> POD (developed for the perl documentation), TeXInfo, muse.  I don't
> see why Org-mode needs to be able to do the same.
>
> The one thing I would be interested in is indeed to produce one very
> general format that would allow people to do with it whatever they
> want.  My feeling is that such a format could be based on the current
> HTML exporter because it does a complete structural analysis of an
> Org-mode document, and the output could be some kind of semantic-only
> HTML, or XML, or whatever.  I have not taken any steps toward
> implementing this, and right now I don't see it happening.
>
> - Carsten
>
>

-- 
Dave O'Toole
dto@gnu.org