Open namoopsoo opened 1 year ago
As for including the block embed in a "hugo-single-export", I had this theory that maybe the embedded block did not get included because it was in a page which did not have public:: true
, so I fixed that and I set public:: true
for that journal page and I tried both "hugo-single-export" and "export-public-pages-to-hugo" and in both cases, the page with the {{embed ((63f10b5d-f204-4ce6-8e4d-52f975e644fe))}}
block embed, does not get included in the output markdown.
And when I tried the logseq native "Export graph > Export public pages" , in that case, the page with the embed, does export showing the embedded content just fine. (But yea logseq native export creates one giant "index.html" which is not really the same as individual markdown files.)
Hi! I tried with "logseq-schrodinger version 1.3.0" first time today the "hugo-single-export" on a page today. I got a nice output. Pretty cool! Thanks!
For logseq, I like the "write everything in Journal/Daily view, referring to specific nodes as you go"
and currently I manually select the block I want to publish in a "YYY_MM_DD.md" and manually put that into my hugo
content/en/post/YYY-MM-DD-stuff.md
. I am getting tired just writing that sentence 😅 .With your plugin I tried to select just a block
and "hugo-single-export" and in the sidebar I get
Uncaught (in promise) Error: Expected string, got: nil
,From what I see "Line 151, Column 57" of "helpers.js" refers to the
global.document
of the line 151,so I am guessing in logseq, for a block
global.document
is not a thing?I also tried embedding
So I created a new evergreen note, and I added
in there, and when I ran "hugo-single-export", here the embedded part, only included the text from the parent block being embedded but not from the children.
Maybe the block publish is not common?
My first basic question is whether the publishing of blocks is supported and maybe I'm doing this wrong. And second I am wondering what are your thoughts on how common this publishing style is and whether you think the idea belongs in "logseq-schrodinger" in some future future iteration or whether maybe it is not worth it?
-Michal