Hello, Aaron Ecay <aarone...@gmail.com> writes:
> I have a hunch that this is backwards. It seems like the convention > has been to allow arbitrary special blocks in org files. Sticking to > what I know best, these create arbitrarily-named environments in Latex. > Export blocks seem like the special case (e.g. the number of types is > constrained by the available export modules), and so they should have > to bear special marking. Historically (i.e. pre-8.0), so-called export blocks were a core feature, whereas special blocks were defined in an optional library (IIRC "org-special-blocks.el"). That explains why my proposal was to optionally activate special blocks and not the other way round. We can instead use #+begin_latex :raw t ... #+end_latex to optionally activate an export block instead of a special block. I don't mind either way. > What if you used the convention that all export blocks had the form > #+begin_export_latex, #+begin_export_html, etc.? This should be > unambiguous to parse. (It’s possible to bikeshed about the name, of > course: perhaps #+begin_literal_latex etc.) One drawback, however, is that is prevents any special block name from starting with "export" (or any post-bikeshedding name that could be issued). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
