Lars Tveito <larst...@student.matnat.uio.no> writes: > Hi, thanks for checking it out! > Getting it to work with source-blocks was the feature I missed the most > from the vanilla markdown exporter. If you specify a language in the > source-block it will be added to the exported version as well; a problem > occurs if you specify a language not supported by Github. Emacs lisp is > an example of this, so there is a alist `org-gfm-lang' which by default > has the value: > > (("emacs-lisp" . "lisp") ("elisp" . "lisp")) > > So a source block like this: > > #+begin_src emacs-lisp > (defun foo () > 'foo) > #+end_src > > exports to this: > > ```lisp > (defun foo () > 'foo) > ``` > > Which provides syntax highlighting in Github Flavored Markdown.
I see, its a feature not a bug ;) To me it looked as if the exporter had failed on this, but as an Org user I never digged very deep in (Github Flavored) Markdown syntax. >> - Just like the Org exporter in general, it does not know how to deal >> with boxes made with rebox2.el, so I replaced them with example >> blocks. >> > > I am not familiar with rebox2.el. This back-end inherits most > functionality from the markdown (vanilla) exporter, which again inherits > from the html exporter. Since rebox2.el doesn't play nice with any of > those it will cause problems with the github flavored as well. > > If you'd like the boxes created with rebox2.el to appear in the exported > version you could possibly wrap it inside an example-block. I think this was basically fixed by Nicolas yesterday, at least when I tried with 'ascii backend the results were quite nice. >> - What about numbered lists with longer text/blocks as item content - is >> the item numbering supposed to work? > > I hadn't tested this, but found an old org-file with notes packed with > different lists. I generated it, and most of it looks good: > https://gist.github.com/anonymous/694b7b5f53dd21850bcd (by the way, the > content is rubbish, and in Norwegian). > > The only problems are with latex-code mixed in the document and sloppy > work from the original org file. I will do some further experiments with this, at first I thought it does not work, but maybe its just me not complying with Org syntax demands (and this would most likely not a specific problem of you exporter neither). -- cheers, Thorsten