Hi Eric, Rick, Francois and others, Nicolas commented to me about this patch that he was wondering if it would not be better to have a separate backend for html5, i.e. ox-html5.el that could be derived from ox-html.el and make it easier in the future to build it out to take full advantage of html5 features. I think he has a point, and I would like to hear your comments.
Thanks - Carsten On 2.5.2013, at 23:07, Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> wrote: > Rick Frankel <r...@rickster.com> writes: > >> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 08:26:52PM -0700, Eric Abrahamsen wrote: >>> Rick Frankel <r...@rickster.com> writes: >>> >>>> Whoops. Wrong key. Patch actually attached to this email... >>>> rick >>> >>> Great, I'll consolidate all these -- would it be better to mush them >>> into one big patch, or to keep them separate (I suppose for ease of >>> rollback, if something goes wrong)? >> >> Probably squashing them into one patch would be the best. But Carsten >> or Bastien might disagree :). >> >> rick > > Okay, there it is: one big patch (including your xml declaration fix). > > I didn't add any more refined handling of the html5-fancy option. As a > second-order option it didn't seem worthy of an #+OPTIONS entry, and I > didn't bother checking for an empty string, either. It can always be > #+BINDed if necessary, and if it ever annoys anyone I can fix it > further. > > E > > <0001-ox-html.el-Export-to-different-X-HTML-flavors-includ.patch>
