From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Process hlines in imported tables Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 21:27:17 +0200 Message-ID: <86fvyrmw6i.fsf@somewhere.org> References: <20130329014615.GA49671@BigDog.local> <87wqsq6yd1.fsf@gmail.com> <20130329214238.GA53401@BigDog.local> <87r4ixah7y.fsf@gmail.com> <20130330234151.GA53721@BigDog.local> <87mwtkqtzh.fsf@gmail.com> <20130331122900.GA57939@BigDog.local> <87vc83bhma.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <867gkiz99z.fsf@somewhere.org> <87mwtepce2.fsf@gmail.com> <866202ko2q.fsf@somewhere.org> <868v4keyeb.fsf@somewhere.org> <87mwszhl0y.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: 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-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Eric, Eric Schulte wrote: > "Sebastien Vauban" writes: >> "Sebastien Vauban" wrote: >>> Eric Schulte wrote: >>>> I would agree that this (meaning raw implies scalar) should either occur >>>> for all languages or for none. >>> >>> I think this is something interesting, but I wonder now if we wouldn't loose >>> more than we would win. I mean: how would one be able to output a real "raw" >>> result, then, that is one where pipes are not interpreted as table field >>> separator which have to be aligned in some specific way. >>> >>> Do we need another argument for that? >>> >>> I mean: at the end, raw should really be raw (no interpretation). If we want >>> some cycling for table alignment purpose (BTW, do you have lots of such code >>> blocks?), maybe it'd be better to introduce a `cycle' argument or so? >> >> I think that this portion of my post has been ignored in your answers -- which >> I still have to carefully look at. >> >> Though, I don't think the above question should stay unanswered: if you now >> "cycle" on all "raw" results, how do we insert real "raw" results for which we >> don't want any interpretation (not even cycling tables, or what you be >> confounded as tables)? > > Is this a hypothetical problem or do you have a use case which requires > non-cycling? At this stage, completely hypothetical. It's just that we remove some possibility which existed: from now on, we can't insert some types of data anymore. And I feel that the name "raw" does not conform anymore to the reality. But, as said, I don't have a real problem at hand. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban