> I understand the problem, but the solution should not be: "let's pretend > export does not exist".
>From my perspective any org object that is not in a section that allows org objects could in principle be parsed as such, but it would not be in the core of the grammar, and it also would have to parse to something that did not trigger side effects related to export. Allowing org objects to appear at arbitrary places in the grammar is definitely not a good idea because in many senses they cannot actually be those objects. Maybe the syntax could be the same, but they would have to be "shadow objects" or something like that? Best, Tom