Regarding any use case which would benefit from turning
org-html-style-default into a defcustom, IMO there are two:
+ When you don't want to have to add a #+HTML_HEAD to every file you
export
+ When you want to include a long inline style (my use case)
--
Timothy
On 2021-02-13, Timothy wrote:
> Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
>
>> On 2021-02-12, Jens Lechtenboerger wrote:
>>
>>> I do not know why the CDATA lines exist. I don’t see a reason to
>>> keep them (patch 0001), but that might be a lack of understanding on
>>> my part.
>>
>> OK, that is probably for
Tim Cross writes:
> BTW I think it would be nice if the html export was able to produce/use
> a separate CSS file rather than in-line styles. This would make it
> easier to drop exported HTML files into existing sites with custom
> styles or update the look of exported files without needing to r
On Saturday, 13 Feb 2021 at 08:46, Tim Cross wrote:
> BTW I think it would be nice if the html export was able to produce/use
> a separate CSS file rather than in-line styles. This would make it
> easier to drop exported HTML files into existing sites with custom
> styles or update the look of expo
Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
> On 2021-02-12, Kyle Meyer wrote:
>
>> TEC writes:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> This is just some tweaks to the styling in ox-html that I think may
>>> appeal (and prevent ridiculously long lines on non-small displays, which
>>> are an issue for legibility).
>>>
>>> I als
Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
> On 2021-02-12, Jens Lechtenboerger wrote:
>
>> I do not know why the CDATA lines exist. I don’t see a reason to
>> keep them (patch 0001), but that might be a lack of understanding on
>> my part.
>
> OK, that is probably for XHTML, where < and & are only allowed
>
Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
> I do not know why the CDATA lines exist. I don’t see a reason to
> keep them (patch 0001), but that might be a lack of understanding on
> my part.
I'll cover this in my reply to your follow-up.
> Patch 0003 is about whitespace fixes.
>
> Patches 0002, 0004, 0005
On 2021-02-12, Jens Lechtenboerger wrote:
> I do not know why the CDATA lines exist. I don’t see a reason to
> keep them (patch 0001), but that might be a lack of understanding on
> my part.
OK, that is probably for XHTML, where < and & are only allowed
inside CDATA sections.
Timothy, did you t
On 2021-02-12, Kyle Meyer wrote:
> TEC writes:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This is just some tweaks to the styling in ox-html that I think may
>> appeal (and prevent ridiculously long lines on non-small displays, which
>> are an issue for legibility).
>>
>> I also took the opportunity to remove the (obsole
TEC writes:
> Hi All,
>
> This is just some tweaks to the styling in ox-html that I think may
> appeal (and prevent ridiculously long lines on non-small displays, which
> are an issue for legibility).
>
> I also took the opportunity to remove the (obsolete) CDATA strings and
> make the CSS more co
Gah! I left the subject as a placeholder [shame emoji].
Apologies for that.
Why do I always seem to notice these things as the Email is sending...
--
Timothy
TEC writes:
> Hi All,
>
> This is just some tweaks to the styling in ox-html that I think may
> appeal (and prevent ridiculously long
11 matches
Mail list logo
