On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:43 PM, Suvayu Ali <fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Carsten, >> >> On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 01:27:57PM +0200, Carsten Dominik wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 5, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>>>> #+/home/matt/Matt_headshots/Matt Price/IMG_9367_.jpg >>>>>> http://2013.hackinghistory.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/wpid-IMG_9367_2.jpg >>>>> >>>>> I don't think this is the right behavior, such lines should not be >>>>> rendered. >>>>> Suvayu is right, with a space after the # they are treated as commendt, >>>>> but I think >>>>> they should also be ignored with the plus. >>>>> >>>>> Nicolas, what is the reasoning behind rendering them? >>>> >>>> Because this isn't valid Org syntax, so it is treated as regular text >>>> (i.e. a paragraph). Something similar happens for unbalanced blocks: >>> >>> So in a way this is a "syntax error" message. :) >>> >>> OK, I get that point. Is that behaviour documented? >> >> I think it is more of a "I don't recognise this as special syntax; it >> must be text". In that case, I'm not sure what can be documented, one >> can have infinitely many text blurbs which look very similar to valid >> Org syntax but isn't. >> >> I have noticed quite a few posts on the list with this kind of >> misunderstanding. I think the confusion arises from thinking of special >> keywords like "#+options:", "#+attr_latex:", etc as comments. AFAIU, >> they are not. Lines starting with "#+" are possible keywords, whereas >> lines starting with "# " are comments.
(sorry, posted my last msg before I saw the more recent contributions) So how would you suggest org2blog keep track of the relationship between local and uploaded files? Should it define a new keyword (perhaps" #+remote:" )? And if so how is that best done? Quickly looking at "Export Options (12.2) in the manual I don't see a built-in mechanism for defining backend-specific options. Something like "#+ATTR_BLOG: remote" might do the trick, but adding multiple links to such a line would be cumbersome, wouldn't it? Thanks again for your help clarifying this.