From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: what happened to :wrap HTML ? Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 23:48:27 +0100 Message-ID: <87mvqp4tdw.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87r3g17rpu.fsf@alphaville.usersys.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46961) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYiCV-0002lR-8F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:46:32 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYiCQ-0003hM-9E for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:46:31 -0500 Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.195]:44538) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aYiCQ-0003fJ-3E for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 17:46:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87r3g17rpu.fsf@alphaville.usersys.redhat.com> (Nick Dokos's message of "Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:56:13 -0500") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Nick Dokos Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Nick Dokos writes: > Giuseppe Lipari writes: > >> Hello, >> >> I used to generate html code with a python script using org-babel, like this: >> >> %------- example.org ---------% >> * This is an example of export in HTML >> #+BEGIN_SRC python :exports results :results output :wrap HTML >> print "
  • first item
  • " >> print "
  • second item
  • " >> print "
" >> #+END_SRC >> %------- example.org ---------% >> >> This used to work just fine and produce a nice unordered list in html. Until the moment I updated to the >> current development version: >> >> Org-mode version 8.3.4 (release_8.3.4-588-g924431 @ /home/lipari/elisp/org-mode/lisp/) >> >> Now, it produces the attached screenshot: >> >> snapshot >> >> Hence my question: what happened to ":wrap HTML" ?? Is there an equivalent way to express the same >> behaviour as before? >> > > I bet :wrap HTMP produces > > #+BEGIN_HTML > ... > #+END_HTML > > instead of > > #+BEGIN_EXPORT HTML > #+END_EXPORT So I guess the OP should write :wrap export HTML. We could also add the export part automatically, but that would limit the value of the parameter (e.g., impossible to do anything else than export blocks) Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou