Christian Straßer writes:

Hello Michael,

thanks for thinking about the problem.
In my case some projects organized with muse are wikis. But I also use
planner-el together with remember-el for planning and making notes.
Sometimes it occurs that I'd like to import planner pages in muse-wiki
project pages (especially cause of the notes section; as I use a lot the
ability to put notes on different pages, I have some "notes-only" pages
organized in categories (so: something like a multi-category blog)).
I think the first option you mentioned (the one with the manual style
choice) allows more freedom. In my case also the second would do.
Another interesting feature would be to be able to insert sections only,
like:
<include file="../plans/Work.muse" style="planner-html" section="Notes">

Context:

I hadn't thought before about the possibility of including Muse pages
that are published to different styles. The problem occurs because
the markup for the current page is used on the inserted page.

I've start to work on a fix, but I want to get some feedback from the
community at large before I change anything.

There are several possibilities. One is to allow the publishing style
to be specified as part of the <include> tag. For example:

<include file="../plans/Work.muse" style="planner-html">

Another possibility would be to try and figure out what publishing
style to use for the remote file based on its entry in
muse-project-alist. Muse has logic that can be used to pick the
remote publishing style that has the same extension as the output of
the current file will have. Then, the following would "just work".

<include file="../plans/Work.muse">

So does anyone see any use case for the first possibility? Does
anyone feel particularly strongly that the second possibility is
better?

(Or we could even do the second, but allow the first, if someone
specifies something for "style". I'd still like to know at least one
person would bother using it, though, before I implement that.)