From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: [PATCH] export to various flavors of (X)HTML Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 09:48:23 +0200 Message-ID: References: <86wqrtwisf.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca> <517732AF.6080308@gmail.com> <86y5c82hxy.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca> <871u9ytihc.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <8f433f7c2e7d4892d6286afc9524d9a6@mail.rickster.com> <87li85tdsm.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <20130426184949.GB79236@BigDog.local> <87bo8xeuxd.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87zjwfnzwj.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <20130501115503.GB83182@BigDog.local> <87k3nhqeed.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <874negh85u.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47324) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UZG9o-0000EJ-OL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 03:48:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UZG9m-0001ot-FP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 03:48:24 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::22a]:48983) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UZG9m-0001oh-5P for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 06 May 2013 03:48:22 -0400 Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id j13so2362719wgh.3 for ; Mon, 06 May 2013 00:48:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <874negh85u.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> 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: Eric Abrahamsen Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Eric, thanks for the reply. OK, I am going with the patch for now, let's push more thinking about HTML5 further down the line. Thanks for working this out! - Carsten On 6.5.2013, at 09:36, Eric Abrahamsen wrote: > Carsten Dominik writes: > >> Hi Eric, Rick, Francois and others, >> >> Nicolas commented to me about this patch that he was wondering if it >> would not be better to have a separate backend for html5, i.e. >> ox-html5.el that could be derived from ox-html.el and make it easier >> in the future to build it out to take full advantage of html5 features. >> I think he has a point, and I would like to hear your comments. > > My initial reaction is: yes, eventually, but perhaps not now. A few > reasons: > > 1. This patch is already done, and it works, modulo bugfixes (not a > great reason, I know). > > 2. The patch ended up with two predicate functions (org-html-xhtml-p and > org-html-html5-p) because we really are dealing with four distinct > states: X or not, and 5 or not. Splitting off ox-html5 only isolates one > of those predicates: the "X or not" question would still have to be > asked and answered in both ox-html and ox-html5. You could just as well > split it the other way (ox-xhtml and ox-html), and have the X variants > actually build a DOM tree and write xml (I'm not actually advocating > that, but I just read this[1]). > > 3. The change to org-html-special-block takes care of the large majority > of new html5 features. The change to inline-images is fairly small. > Otherwise, there are many new inline elements that could be used, but in > many cases browser support for these is limited or nonexistent, and even > basic syntax is up in the air. They can wait (or be handled with custom > link types). > > More importantly, the html5 version of, for example, the formatting of > timestamps would look very like the (x)html(4) version, except that the > final tag would be a bit different (