emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com>
To: Thorsten Jolitz <tjolitz@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Tabular overview of org-element.el
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 21:07:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87li8dkom9.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fvyl3use.fsf@gmail.com> (Thorsten Jolitz's message of "Sat, 20 Apr 2013 20:45:53 +0200")

Thorsten Jolitz <tjolitz@gmail.com> writes:

> So in fact there are link objects that might belong to 'decorated-link'
> or 'plain-link', but this has not been made explicit because there is
> only one special case where its not sufficient to simply use super-type
> 'link'.

That and the fact that it was introduced very recently.

> Maybe its worth to notice that wrt 'plain-link' there are some hidden
> implicit things going on in the background. First of all, there are no
> other subtypes of object-types - object 'link' would be the only
> object-type with two subtypes ('plain-link' and 'decorated-link' or
> whatever). And the object 'link' is used as successor but does not fit
> all situations where a link can be used.

Actually there is also `radio-link' sub-type. But it doesn't need its
own successor function so far.

> I know this might be of no practical relevance at the moment, and might
> seem like a case of excessive pea-counting, but now that Org-mode has
> such a wonderful parsing and exporting framework, there might well be a
> trend towards more formalization in the future - and this will cause
> hiccups for anyone who tries such formalization.

To be honest, I hope that Org will grow a proper syntax for images
instead (i.e. without overloading link syntax). Many (most?) text markup
languages have one (e.g. Markdown). If it does, the `plain-link'
successor becomes useless and the case is closed.

> To keep the system consistent, there should be two types of link objects
> ('plain-link' and 'decorated-link') that are both successors too, and
> maybe additionally a successor category 'link' that can be applied when
> distinction between the two link object-types does not matter.

That's what I talked about indeed, but besides consistency, there's not
much benefit to do that. I'd rather have images as full-fledged objects,
something like:


which could possibly be extended with properties for export:

  [img:"...." :prop1 val1 :prop2 val2]


Nicolas Goaziou

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-20 19:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-20 15:18 Tabular overview of org-element.el Thorsten Jolitz
2013-04-20 16:34 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2013-04-20 17:15   ` Thorsten Jolitz
2013-04-20 17:42     ` Nicolas Goaziou
2013-04-20 18:45       ` Thorsten Jolitz
2013-04-20 19:07         ` Nicolas Goaziou [this message]
2013-04-20 20:45           ` Thorsten Jolitz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information: https://www.orgmode.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87li8dkom9.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=n.goaziou@gmail.com \
    --cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
    --cc=tjolitz@gmail.com \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox


This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).