Re: [Orgmode] Re: Worg needs some reorganizing

[Jason Dunsmore]

Jeff Horn <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Dan Davison <address@hidden> wrote:
>> I strongly second this. In fact I'll stick my neck out more: Worg is
>> great, but for tutorials on org-mode, HTML export is often the wrong
>> format for obvious reasons (i.e. unless you go to some trouble, it
>> conceals a lot of the org syntax). I'm tempted to suggest that htmlized
>> output should be the default format for many org tutorials on Worg.
>
> I respectfully disagree with your assertion. When someone writes a
> document "properly", i.e. in a literate fashion, i.e. using org source
> blocks, the right syntax is shown at the right time. Please see the
> manual as an example.
>
> Now, I'm no fan of nerfing choices in order to force anyone to do
> things "The Right Way (tm)", but it bears mentioning.
>
> I see no harm in publishing using org-publish-org-to-org with htmlize.
> We could even add a link in the footer or header of each page that
> links to the htmlized source. I do *not* agree in making it the
> "default format" for any page.

FYI, Bastien implemented the htmlize version of Worg Tuesday.  You can
see it on any Worg page by replacing .html with .org.html.  Example:

http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/intro.org.html
http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/intro.html

Maybe we should add some colors to that htmlize output.  I agree a link
to the Org version on every page would be useful.