From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: Citation syntax: a revised proposal Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:01:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87a908qrmm.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87k2zjnc0e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87bnkvm8la.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87zj8co3se.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87ioezooi2.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87mw4bpaiu.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <8761aznpiq.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87twyjnh0r.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87oaopx24e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87k2zd4f3w.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87egpkv8g9.fsf@berkeley.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51442) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOtlm-0008PA-1S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:01:51 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOtlh-0005ZG-Uh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:01:49 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:43365) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YOtlh-0005Z8-Om for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:01:45 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YOtlg-00079q-HV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:01:44 +0100 Received: from 46.166.186.241 ([46.166.186.241]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:01:44 +0100 Received: from rasmus by 46.166.186.241 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:01:44 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Samuel Wales writes: > if everybody is already thinking along the same lines, great. I think everybody is thinking along the lines, but some people want to not have another link-morass :) In particular, I think we are trying hard to avoid this situation: i just think the syntax we design should, if possible, be so general that it can be used for future features, *including 100% unrelated features*, and also for future subfeatures of any feature, including citations. These days, my impression is that Org developers like to have [fn:·] always be of a footnote type and *bold* always be of bold type. > to me, that means plist or similar. A lambda (that is a cite-subtype) is ∞ more customizable than a plist. But at least by having a cite-like prefix Org forces you to write something unappealing like, [cite:color-bar-pink-and-change-bar-to-baz: foo @bar] Which might discourage you to something stupid. A generalization of, say macros and link which look like [FUN: :key value] or [FUN: arg]{:key value} may be appropriate, but it's something different from the discussion at hand. —Rasmus -- Hvor meget poesi tror De kommer ud af et glas isvand?