From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: - before *, special C-a with plain lists, and * to - conversion Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:14:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87abss4vwv.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <87zm0y24ej.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <6fb6621d0f9470dda2df3448dcf7773d@science.uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ILLWF-00069c-UK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:14:52 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ILLWD-00068a-Tx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:14:51 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ILLWD-00068V-Qc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:14:49 -0400 Received: from hu-out-0506.google.com ([72.14.214.234]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ILLWD-0002fW-Hm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:14:49 -0400 Received: by hu-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 23so1840398huc for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2007 09:14:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6fb6621d0f9470dda2df3448dcf7773d@science.uva.nl> (Carsten Dominik's message of "Wed\, 15 Aug 2007 14\:20\:35 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Carsten Dominik writes: >>> This sounds indeed familiar, so this has been discussed before. What >>> do people thing who use the special C-a for headlines? Should we >>> have this in items as well??? >> >> Why not - but only as an option, no? > > My ideas was to not use a special option, but to assume that if people > want this for headlines, they will also want this for items. Is that > assumption wrong? It's certainly right. I've beeen using this option for a while but i'm not anymore. Hence my skepticism. > No, orgstruct-mode will not incorporate this feature. All right. -- Bastien