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 12:19:29 -0600 Message-ID: <87y4e5n2dq.fsf@fastmail.fm> References: <871tc83p01.fsf@flynn.nichework.com> <84611j19hk.fsf@gmail.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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36680) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwDW3-00035h-BC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:19:36 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwDVz-0003bH-CC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:19:35 -0500 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:45158) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZwDVz-0003b1-81 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:19:31 -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 07112C016F3 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 13:19:29 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (John Wiegley's message of "Mon, 09 Nov 2015 17:52:35 -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: > There is another vector to consider, and a far more nebulous one: How does it > impact Org's "luft"? That is, the feeling of ease and comfort Org conveys in > its use. FWIW, I personally have found org both faster and much more reliable thanks to Nicolas' heroic work to tighten up org syntax. Org files open faster, the agenda parses faster, the exporter is orders of magnitude more consistent, org babel blocks behave as expected, etc. And the user interaction has far fewer glitches than I experienced before the change. For instance, for years, org mode functions on my machine often inserted property drawers inside of property drawers or inserted multiple property drawers in a single entry. In my experience, the changes to the parser have made all this much more robust and predictable. So for me, the increasing robustness of org mode makes it feel easier, more pleasant to use. > There are many highly functional alternatives to Org that I've tried > and rejected because they lack the easy grace of Org. That grace is > why I've been able to stick with it after almost 9,000 handled tasks. > Any perception of "inertia" in a tasking system causes me to > psychologically avoid it, even if I have no rational basis for that > aversion. > > I sincerely hope that those with high technical motives will keep in mind the > usability of Org beyond purely technical considerations. It should say > something that a long-time user is unhappy with the way Org "feels" in 8.3. I'm not sure "purely technical" is fair characterization of the reasons for the syntax changes. As I understand it, the chief reason that org syntax needed a cleanup is because of the massive amount of functionality that org mode acquired over the years. Ensuring all this worked smoothly and robustly for users required a more regular, predictable syntax. So user experience was key to the changes as well. Best, Matt