Re: [HELP] Fwd: Org format as a new standard source format for GNU manuals

[Max Nikulin]

On 01/10/2022 18:01, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> Max Nikulin writes:
>
> > I do not remember if the following idea has been discussed. What about
> > extending source blocks and inline source snippets to allow :results ast
> > header argument that caused executing during export only and expects
> > s-expression with AST branch that is included into parsed tree without
> > intermediate Org markup representation? Then a special org-babel backend
> > may be created to support new markup type. I am unsure however at which
> > stage of export source blocks are executed, maybe too early to implement
> > the idea. The advantage is that no extension of Org syntax is necessary.
>
> This will not help with new extendable markup elements. No new org
> element types can be created this way. We still need generalized inline
> markup object.
>
> This can help with escaping syntax and spaces in verbatim.

It should be enough to create nested "code" or "verbatim" inline objects 
with some attribute like :class file, :class var, :class dfn, etc. 
Export backend may interpret this attribute to create proper texinfo 
commands or more precisely choose HTML element.

> I do recall you mentioned this idea in one of the earlier threads.
> https://orgmode.org/list/sokqa3$e8s$1@ciao.gmane.io
> Max Nikulin (2021-12-06)
> Subject: Raw Org AST snippets for "impossible" markup

It was using links, not source blocks. Typing AST directly is a kind of 
last resort. Now I am writing about some higher level markup with a 
parser that allows nested element and uses just a few special characters 
to denote commands. It is a kind of trade-off between brevity of 
lightweight markup and flexibility of more verbose language with ability 
to more precisely express intentions.