* Syntax inconsistency?
@ 2014-11-03 1:31 Marcin Borkowski
2014-11-03 8:28 ` Nicolas Goaziou
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marcin Borkowski @ 2014-11-03 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Org-Mode mailing list
Hello,
just wondering: on one hand, we have lines like
#+OPTIONS: toc:nil
On the other hand, we have
#+ATTR_ASCII: :width 10
Why is the syntax (seemingly, at least) inconsistent? Why not
`width:10' or `:toc nil'?
Best,
--
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Syntax inconsistency?
2014-11-03 1:31 Syntax inconsistency? Marcin Borkowski
@ 2014-11-03 8:28 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-11-03 13:17 ` Marcin Borkowski
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Goaziou @ 2014-11-03 8:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marcin Borkowski; +Cc: Org-Mode mailing list
Hello,
Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl> writes:
> just wondering: on one hand, we have lines like
>
> #+OPTIONS: toc:nil
This is a keyword.
> On the other hand, we have
>
> #+ATTR_ASCII: :width 10
This is an attribute.
> Why is the syntax (seemingly, at least) inconsistent? Why not
> `width:10' or `:toc nil'?
These are two different things, so there is no real reason to make them
look like each other. Also, and more importantly, moving OPTIONS to the
other syntax is, IMO, unreadable:
#+OPTIONS: :| t :^ nil :* t :\n t
Note there is also another syntax type, e.g.,:
#+TOC: headlines 2
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: Syntax inconsistency?
2014-11-03 8:28 ` Nicolas Goaziou
@ 2014-11-03 13:17 ` Marcin Borkowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Marcin Borkowski @ 2014-11-03 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Org-Mode mailing list
On 2014-11-03, at 09:28, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl> writes:
>
>> just wondering: on one hand, we have lines like
>>
>> #+OPTIONS: toc:nil
>
> This is a keyword.
>
>> On the other hand, we have
>>
>> #+ATTR_ASCII: :width 10
>
> This is an attribute.
>
>> Why is the syntax (seemingly, at least) inconsistent? Why not
>> `width:10' or `:toc nil'?
>
> These are two different things, so there is no real reason to make them
> look like each other. Also, and more importantly, moving OPTIONS to the
> other syntax is, IMO, unreadable:
>
> #+OPTIONS: :| t :^ nil :* t :\n t
>
> Note there is also another syntax type, e.g.,:
>
> #+TOC: headlines 2
Thanks for your clarifications! Things seem still a bit hazy for me,
but I guess I'll have to live with it:-).
> Regards,
Best,
--
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Adam Mickiewicz University
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-11-03 13:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-11-03 1:31 Syntax inconsistency? Marcin Borkowski
2014-11-03 8:28 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-11-03 13:17 ` Marcin Borkowski
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
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).