Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes: > I don't see it as reinventing the wheel. One example, does pandoc have > something like the ox filters?
It does; see e.g. http://pandoc.org/scripting.html Pandoc filters are actually more powerful than Org filters in most cases, because they are AST transformations. Pattern matching makes it convenient and practical in Haskell to just transform the part of the tree you're interested in. And because the Pandoc data structure has a JSON serialization format, filters can be written in just about any language, not just Haskell. This is an nice system, IMHO, which has one big advantage: it is possible to write complex filters (i.e., those that do more than just simple string manipulation) in an output-agnostic way. Pandoc filters can do things which are generally only possible or convenient to do in Org by creating a derived backend, which isn't output-agnostic. Best, Richard
