Re: [O] feature request: best practices for speaker notes and incremental lists/elements

[Matt Price]

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> wrote:

Hello,

Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:

> Matt Price <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I think the two exporters should use the same syntax! I especially think
>> that any future exporters should use a single, unified syntax, and that
>> the older exporters should eventualyl be changed to support that new
>> syntax.  And finally, I think the new syntax should be as simple as
>> humanly possible.  So I'd like to suggest that the community decide on
>> the best way forward.
>
> We can try to make a common syntax across our exporter, namely ox-desk,
> ox-beamer and ox-s5 to the extend that these support "speaker notes".  A
> "pull request" can then be made to ox-reveal.el, which AFAIK is neither
> part of lisp or contrib/lisp.

Note that "common syntax" probably means less features (i.e., we are
limited to common features).

Yes, certainly -- there would doubtless still be a need for some backend-specific hacks, just not as many as we currently have. 

As suggested, I think, it seems better to create a generic export
back-end from scratch, which would allow to select a target (e.g.,
beamer, reveal.js...), than altering current back-ends and enter
backward-compatibility's hell.

That does sound like a good idea. Can I ask, what syntactical structures seem best to you? 

 

Regards,

--
Nicolas Goaziou