emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] [new exporter] [html] Tables of Contents


From: T.F. Torrey
Subject: Re: [O] [new exporter] [html] Tables of Contents
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 13:59:21 -0700

Hello Jambunathan,

I admire your energy and coding skill, but I wish you would stop
occupying our time with replies like this.  Your tone is insulting, and
seems deliberately so, and none of this response is helpful to the
original thread.

I won't reply to more of your posts like this, so if you don't get a
reply, know that it's because your message was insulting and off-topic.
I'm only sending this on the odd chance that you are not aware of what
you are doing, in which case this might be helpful to you.

If you want to follow up to this message, I invite you to do so
off-list, where it might have been best for me to post this as well.

Best regards,
Terry

Jambunathan K <address@hidden> writes:

> address@hidden (T.F. Torrey) writes:
>
>>>> This gives a significant advantage in that authors can link to the
>>>> various instances just by knowing their own usage.  For instance, if
>>>> they provided a top-level toc at the beginning of their book, and a
>>>> deeper-level toc later on, they could link to each separately by id by
>>>> knowing this plan.
>>>
>>> This seems like a valid use-case.  
>>>
>>> I would recommend that you just specify just the use-case and leave out
>>> the "how"s of implementation.
>>>
>>> Put your user hat and set aside the developer's hat.
>>
>> What a strange, semi-insulting thing to say.
>
> There is nothing strange in what I said.  I wasn't insulting.
>
>> And misguided, too, as I was suggesting a design, not its
>> implementation.  As someone with all my own documents in Org and
>> extensive experience developing XSLT and lisp to process the XHTML
>> output of Org, I appreciate when the design of the HTML output is
>> logical and useful.
>
> When you were suggesting 
>
>         #+toc: :a b :b c :c d
>
> that is implementation specifics and you were arguing from a HTML
> standpoint.  If you were in fact designing, you would have articulated
> your case for other backends and how your suggested changes would impact
> ox.el.
>
>> I would rather see a good design implemented in hacks than a poor design
>> implemented in beautiful code.
>
> If you have better ideas, show us the patch.  
>
> Otherwise, I suggest that you wear your user hat and place the use-case
> before use while others can take care of the details.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]