Christian Kellermann <ck...@pestilenz.org> writes:

> I first thought about using ODT_STYLES_FILE in the list form and
> pick out the content.xml from there, but maybe that's a bit unexpected
> as one might use a different content than from the style.
> But the control flow as it is now would need to be refactored to
> make this a nice patch too.
> I shall resend this patch with proper docstrings and manual patches
> if you like.

Please do.

>> I think this is a more general issue: should we implement an
>>   #+OPTIONS: title:nil
>> feature? I think it makes some sense since we already have date:nil and
>> author:nil. In any case, keywords are not meant to be used for booleans.
>> This should be an OPTIONS item.
> I don't feel qualified to decide on this. I can provide the needed
> patches though.

Introducing the item is easy, but making something out of it in each
back-end is not, as it requires to define what title:nil means there. In
particular, should it be "an empty title" or something else?

For example, ascii back-end provides a banner as its title. Should
title:nil remove the title from the banner or should it remove the
banner altogether, thus overriding date:t and author:t items.

Likewise, should title:nil insert "\title{}" in a LaTeX document header,
remove the "\maketitle{}" line, or perhaps, both?

It seems that you answered to that question regarding ODT back-end



Nicolas Goaziou

Reply via email to