Hello,
Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Sebastien Vauban writes: >> Nicolas Goaziou writes: > >>> So this is not a Pandoc export back-end (i.e. a back-end that >>> translates Org syntax into Pandoc's extended Markdown syntax). > >> If the pandoc back-end is some flavor of Markdown, shouldn't it be >> better named `ox-md-pandoc'? > > Which one are you talking about, the one from ELPA or the one > I suggest adding to core? The latter. > The former doesn't translate to Markdown at all. It simply calls > pandoc on an Org document to produce something else. It depends on how > well pandoc's Org importer behaves, i.e, how much Org syntax it does > support. > > Therefore, I suggest to write an Org to native pandoc's syntax. It > would be derived from "ox-md" but that doesn't mean its name must be > prefixed with "ox-md", I'd think it'd make more sense, yes. > consider, for example "ox-beamer" and "ox-latex". Even if it's not necessarily like that for all cases. _My_ point of view is simply to make `ox-pandoc' more visible as an alternative option when one wants to export to Markdown: simply by looking at file names, by Googling or by looking at "require" calls used in other's configs, one would expect that `ox-md' and `ox-md-pandoc' would both generate "markdown". For Beamer, it could be similar, except that people don't necessarily search for "latex" when trying to export to "beamer". Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban
