Matt,
> On Jan 19, 2022, at 5:52 AM, Matt Price <moptop99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> However, I'd really like to add a less verbose syntax, like this:
>
> #+begin_r-stack :frag (appear appear)
> [[imglink1]]
> [[imglink2]]
> #+end_r-stack
>
> My question is: will the exporter preserve information from these header-like arguments, and is
> there a mechanism I can use in a custom ~special-block-function~ to make use of htem?
>
Not as you have it there, but
#+header: :frag (appear appear)
#+begin_r-stack
[[imglink1]]
[[imglink2]]
#+end_r-stack
parses as
(special-block
(:type "r-stack" :begin 727 :end 815 :contents-begin 775 :contents-end 801 :post-blank 0 :post-affiliated 759 :header
(":frag (appear appear)")
:mode nil :granularity element :parent nil))
if that helps.
Ah, thank you. I had never used #+header: before.
THis helps a little, but I guess the parser works from the inside out. That is, the special block contents are already parsed before the block itself. As a result, I don't see how to add classes to the contents on the basis of the block headers. Also, it doesn't seem trivial to identify the "direct children" of the block, the way one might in _javascript_ with, say, ~document.querySelectorAll()~.or just ~elem.children()~. So I'm not convinced my initial impulse to solve the problem this way will be fruitful.
Chuck