From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christian Moe Subject: Re: [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:27:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4EA09242.5040702@christianmoe.com> References: <87pqhrih3s.fsf@gmail.com> <30891.1319141196@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87fwinifqu.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: mail@christianmoe.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50697) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RH06o-0007Ym-Li for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:25:03 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RH06n-000695-Dc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:25:02 -0400 Received: from b1.hitrost.net ([91.185.211.67]:35802) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RH06m-0005yZ-Qp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:25:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87fwinifqu.fsf@gmail.com> 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: Eric Schulte Cc: nicholas.dokos@hp.com, Org Mode Whoa -- before this gets more confusing: Eric, did you push up a (new, or at least so far undocumented in the manual) syntax involving a #+PROPERTIES line, as Nick and Sebastien seem to understand you? Or was #+PROPERTIES just a typo, and you mean using the #+PROPERTY line or :PROPERTIES: drawer, as provided in the manual? Yours, Christian (lamenting the demise of the #+BABEL header I'd just recently started to use) On 10/20/11 10:12 PM, Eric Schulte wrote: > Nick Dokos writes: > >> Eric Schulte wrote: >> >>> I have just pushed up a change to the Org-mode git repository which >>> removes support for #+BABEL lines. Please use the more general >>> #+PROPERTIES lines instead. >>> >> >> Coming late to the dance - sorry. I think that's very confusing. >> "Property" is an overloaded term in org: we now have the :PROPERTIES: >> drawer, the #+PROPERTY line and the #+PROPERTIES line (singular and >> plural forms are already pretty bad). > > Do the #+PROPERTY and #+PROPERTIES lines have different semantics? > >> Also, there is the general concept of properties (the stuff that the >> property API applies to). >> >> Unless there is an underlying unity of which I'm unaware, I'd strongly >> suggest another term - perhaps CODE_BLOCK_HEADER_ARGUMENTS (plus >> an easy-template for easy insertion). >> > > Code blocks already piggy-back off of subtree properties pulling their > header arguments out of the properties specified on the subtree level. > Given that header arguments and properties are already thus interleaved > I believe that properties should be used on the file-wide level as well, > rather than introducing another synonymous keyword which adds no new > functionality. > > Does that make sense? > > Best -- Eric >