From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Lundin Subject: Re: Allowing loose ordering in Org files Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:42:14 -0600 Message-ID: <87si4dlh7d.fsf@fastmail.fm> References: <871tc83p01.fsf@flynn.nichework.com> <5638C2A1.2090801@iancu.ch> <87h9l32gfc.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87d1vq3mh4.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874mh23iw0.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <878u6eu5wg.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <315DDEDC-1BD9-4680-A8C8-B36821EB931C@gmail.com> <874mh2u2w0.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87ziytyl3z.fsf@free.fr> <877flqskci.fsf@gmail.com> <87y4e5vjpw.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58465) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwFkB-0000GH-OR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:42:20 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwFk7-0002dp-NR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:42:19 -0500 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:41613) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwFk7-0002dj-H9 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:42:15 -0500 Received: from archthink (c-50-172-132-15.hsd1.il.comcast.net [50.172.132.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 91BDB6800E1 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:42:14 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:02:09 -0800") 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 John Wiegley writes: >>>>>> Nicolas Goaziou writes: > >> I really don't like the idea of making Org /syntax/ customizable, would it >> be with the help of a hook or a variable. > > From what I've seen so far, several users want regularity of syntax to > decide formatting, and several users want user preference to decide > formatting. There do seem to be larger costs for letting the user > decide; but there are also costs to not letting the user decide, that > I feel are not being appreciated. Could you please be more specific about what the problem is? Apart from the location of properties, are there other forms of flexible formatting that have been lost in recent releases? And what specifically is the problem with a required property drawer location? Is it aesthetic? Functional? > The reason I'm sticking on this point is because it also relates to our future > road map. If Org continues to do this -- to trade flexibility of formatting > for regularity of parsing -- it might continue to alienate some of us. I don't think this is a fair description of the direction org-mode has been taking. I think org-mode has has unparalleled flexibility. If anything, that flexibility has grown over the past few years. E.g., I can enter any number of drawers, tables, lists, code blocks, links, footnotes, etc. in a single entry. And I can export all of that data reliable to a growing number of formats. But when it comes to meta-data, I think it has been helpful to tighten up the syntax. After all, org-mode has always required many types of fixed formatting/syntax. For instance, one can't just put tags anywhere in the body of an entry. Nor can one use arbitrary symbols to designate headline levels. Nor can on put TODO keywords anywhere (despite frequent requests for such functionality). Since org-mode recognizes only one property drawer per entry, it makes sense (for clarity, simplicity, efficiency, etc.) to require that this special key:value metadata be "attached" to the headline (like tags, TODOs, etc.). Matt