Ihor, thanks for the clarification.
maybe, in that ideal world, <<name()>> might expand, optionally. another point: watching Noboru's "most recent" (9?) video, i see another feature of his transclusion: a way to say, "this is *exactly* like a source block -- with language, :results, :tangle, :var, etc., ... except, the actual code is in some other file: when i hit =C-c C-c= here, please set up (based on language), include that source, execute it". that also might be interesting. if i were to think of that, i'd say the verb might *not* be =#+transclude=, but, rather, something source specific (=#+src_ref=?). but, it might allow a =:transclude yes= property. cheers, Greg
