From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ihor Radchenko Subject: Re: org-pop-mode Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 02:15:48 +0800 Message-ID: <87r1xkgsrv.fsf@localhost> References: <7d38c66d-6ea5-ff8f-ee39-142c8dbdcd18@kli.org> <87blou171h.fsf@localhost> <7f5a3798-9128-ac69-c0b2-8f0b9844ab81@shoulson.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56418) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jG5Bq-0007Tr-On for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 14:19:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jG5Bp-0000t4-B3 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 14:19:14 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x102a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a]:34970) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jG5Bp-0000sj-3c for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 14:19:13 -0400 Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id g9so890001pjp.0 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 11:19:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7f5a3798-9128-ac69-c0b2-8f0b9844ab81@shoulson.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-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: "Mark E. Shoulson" , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org > Inline tasks seem to be limited to just body text; you=20 > can't put sub-headings inside them, etc.=C2=A0 Org-pop digressions can=20 > contain sub-headings and whatever other structure, even further=20 > digressions and "pop"s.=C2=A0 So that's something significant that inline= =20 > headings lack. Thanks for clarifying. Do you actually use this feature? It was hard for me to come out with anything fitting my workflow. I tried to play very little with org-pop just now. Generally it looks a lot like inline tasks, but indeed a lot less integrated with standard org features. Some observations: - the visual appearance looks same as normal org structure. While, as you said, inline tasks are generally indented too much, the org-pop approach shows little indication that "inline" headlines are actually any different from normal org subheadings. Yes, you have cycling, but it will not be really useful for entries having more than a screen full of text. Probably, the "inline" headlines should be highlighted in some way.=20 - refiling does not touch the :contd: heading - org-metaright and similar functions mess up the :contd: part - creating the :contd: headline feels too manual for me. A command to create the :contd: headline would be useful, I think. - Archiving does not work In summary, my impression is that hacking the existing inlinetask functionality to change visual appearance of inlinetasks (maybe less indentation) and to allow subtasks could be easier if you really want to integrate the whole thing with org-mode.=20 Best, Ihor "Mark E. Shoulson" writes: > On 3/18/20 3:00 AM, Ihor Radchenko wrote: >>> Any feedback? >> >From the first glance it does not look too different from inline >> headings. Could you highlight the difference? >> >> Best, >> Ihor > > Oh! And I forgot a crucial feature that org-pop has over inline tasks:=20 > you can put any amount of org-mode tree-structure inside an org-pop=20 > digression.=C2=A0 Inline tasks seem to be limited to just body text; you= =20 > can't put sub-headings inside them, etc.=C2=A0 Org-pop digressions can=20 > contain sub-headings and whatever other structure, even further=20 > digressions and "pop"s.=C2=A0 So that's something significant that inline= =20 > headings lack. > > ~mark > > --=20 Ihor Radchenko, PhD, Center for Advancing Materials Performance from the Nanoscale (CAMP-nano) State Key Laboratory for Mechanical Behavior of Materials, Xi'an Jiaotong U= niversity, Xi'an, China Email: yantar92@gmail.com, ihor_radchenko@alumni.sutd.edu.sg