[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] syntax for blocks that the exporter should not render?
From: |
Carsten Dominik |
Subject: |
Re: [O] syntax for blocks that the exporter should not render? |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Sep 2013 13:57:19 +0200 |
On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:43 PM, Suvayu Ali <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Carsten,
>
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 5, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>>>> #+/home/matt/Matt_headshots/Matt Price/IMG_9367_.jpg
>>>>> http://2013.hackinghistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/wpid-IMG_9367_2.jpg
>>>>
>>>> I don't think this is the right behavior, such lines should not be
>>>> rendered.
>>>> Suvayu is right, with a space after the # they are treated as commendt,
>>>> but I think
>>>> they should also be ignored with the plus.
>>>>
>>>> Nicolas, what is the reasoning behind rendering them?
>>>
>>> Because this isn't valid Org syntax, so it is treated as regular text
>>> (i.e. a paragraph). Something similar happens for unbalanced blocks:
>>
>> So in a way this is a "syntax error" message. :)
>>
>> OK, I get that point. Is that behaviour documented?
>
> I think it is more of a "I don't recognise this as special syntax; it
> must be text". In that case, I'm not sure what can be documented, one
> can have infinitely many text blurbs which look very similar to valid
> Org syntax but isn't.
>
> I have noticed quite a few posts on the list with this kind of
> misunderstanding. I think the confusion arises from thinking of special
> keywords like "#+options:", "#+attr_latex:", etc as comments. AFAIU,
> they are not. Lines starting with "#+" are possible keywords, whereas
> lines starting with "# " are comments.
Yes, and I just checked what we have in the manual:
Lines starting with zero or more whitespace characters followed by one
@samp{#} and a whitespace are treated as comments and will never be exported.
So indeed, the white space after the # is in the manual. I had forgotten about
this.
>
> I can see how that can be confusing, but can't think of a way to resolve
> this. I have two possibilities in mind:
> 1. change "# " to something more distict like: "//", or "##",
> 2. use different faces for the two.
Another way to do this would be that every line starting with "#" (no space) is
a comment line, except when it is starting with "#+". This was how I used to
think about lines starting with "#". BUt it is not bad the way it is now - we
just need to be aware and tell people - we just did.
Thanks
- Carsten
>
> (1) is probably too big a change, whereas (2) might be feasible.
>
> Nicolas will probably have a better feeling about what is more
> appropriate here.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Suvayu
>
> Open source is the future. It sets us free.
>
Re: [O] syntax for blocks that the exporter should not render?, Jambunathan K, 2013/09/05