[2022-06-03 Wed 11:45] Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]>:
>
> I'd like to hear if anyone has any idea on how to interpret the
> following:
>
> 1. org-protecting-blocks is an internal auxiliary variable used to
> determine which blocks should be fontified using different major
> mode.
> It's value is ("src" "example" "export")
> So, #+begin_src lang and #+begin_export lang are fontified according
> to LANG. Makes sense.
> However, what about #+begin_example?
> org-element-example-block-parser does not appear to expect language
> specification in the example blocks. Only switches seems to be
> allowed. Am I missing something and Org actually allows example
> blocks to specify language? Or was it the case in the distant past
> versions of Org?
- org-fontify-meta-lines-and-blocks-1
is looking for begin_
what comes after (src) is optional and can be anything
Next it looks for "language" (match-string 5 to 7
— it could be helpful to have comments indicating
the number matching of the groups next to them).
What gets fontified like a source block turns out to be:
,#+begin_{\w} <language> [<switches> <header arguments>]
So this is fontified:
#+begin_quote python
def sss(): pass
#+end_quote
and this too:
#+begin_fly awk
BEGIN { woosh }
#+end_fly
Which is nice, but not interpreted like so
by any export backend.
>
> 3. org-fontify-meta-lines-and-blocks-1 creates a special face for
> ("+title:" "+subtitle:" "+author:" "+email:" "+date:")
> The face name is org-document-info.
> But what about, say, +description: or +language:?
> Would it make more sense to fontify all the keywords from
> org-options-keywords instead?
>
Makes more sense, yes.
I would have named them "directives"
rather than "keywords", but it's too late now.
Regards,
Phil
