Jambunathan K <kjambunat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So I tried > > > > (add-hook 'org-export-preprocess-hook (function > > org-export-blocks-preprocess)) > > > > and I get the comment in the HTML output. > > Is it valid a valid xhtml? >
I have no idea: I was mainly interested in how to make org-exp-blocks to work (for some value of "work") and although I looked at the HTML, I didn't check it. > M-x nxml-mode > C-c C-n (assumming rng validation is on) > > I find that it suffers from the same problem that cropped up wrt special > blocks. See this thread > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2011-10/msg00046.html > > I think the comment blocks are better handled as special blocks instead > of org-exp-blocks. > That may very well be true. > ps: I think number of blocks and hooks in Org reflect number of people > that worked on it :-) > -- > Well, I don't mind a plethora of hooks: they enable things that wouldn't be possible otherwise (and they are even documented and easily findable because of uniform naming: either the M-x org--hook trick which works because of the uniform naming [fn:1] or the Worg (?) page that Carsten pointed to some time ago[fn:2]). As for org-exp-blocks, two out of the three areas of its application, as discussed in the commentary, are deprecated: only comment remains. But contrary to your (tongue-in-cheek) remark, Eric Schulte seems to be single-handedly responsible for all of the block stuff :-) Nick Footnotes: [fn:1] Note to future maintainers: don't ever name a hook anything other than org-foo-bar-hook or else :-) [fn:2] I prefer the first to the second because I can do it right in emacs: no need to go look up URLs and use inferior tools.
