Hello Eric,

Eric S Fraga <esfli...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Sunday, 11 Feb 2018 at 16:29, Michael Welle wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Until I will get bored again, I will stick with Org's beamer export
>> :)[2]. But anyways, if you want to share your experience with
>> ox-reveal, you are welcome.
>
> Every now and again, I also get bored and explore alternatives to beamer
> with org for presentations.
I'm glad I'm not the only one with that 'flaw' ;).


> Reveal is the one that has come the closest
> to working for me but I still end up back with beamer.
Don't get me wrong, reveal is fine. It's just that I can't (within an
appropriate amount of time) produce a slide with the layout I
want (header at the top, footer at the bottom, content centered).


> One of the
> issues I had with reveal last time I played with it was that my
> presentations looked different depending on which browser and/or display
> I used.  There was too much uncertainty in what I would actually get.
>
> But reveal and similar approaches are appealing for their simplicity.
I guess that's the downside of using html. Every render engine has a
certain amount of degrees of freedom on how they can render a html
construct. To tackle that problem my idea was, as a first step, to
produce slides based on reveal.js. That way I can use features, that
might be handy when it comes to teaching stuff. And maybe (I don't have
numbers etc., so I can be totally wrong) it is more likely to have a
more or less decent web browser at hand than a pdf viewer, esp. when it
comes to mobile devices.

As a second step, I wanted to use decktape to generate a pdf file from
the html based slides. That gives me a format with a more reproducible
layout (assuming that the render engine in decktape generates the same
output for subsequent runs).

Regards
hmw

PS: I opened a bug report for org-reveal, asking for an approach to
    tackel to my issue. Maybe someone is so kind and points me in the
    right direction ;).

Reply via email to