From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C3=ABl_Cadilhac?= Subject: Re: Completely hide the :PROPERTIES: drawer in org-mode. Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:17:13 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87lg2l4d2g.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46086) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gteVF-0005fN-Ko for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:18:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gteVD-0003Vx-EX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:18:01 -0500 Received: from cadilhac.name ([163.172.56.42]:33786 helo=mattermost.cadilhac.name) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gteVC-0003HK-V0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 15:17:59 -0500 Received: from mail-vk1-f170.google.com (mail-vk1-f170.google.com [209.85.221.170]) by mattermost.cadilhac.name (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 9b07e1a6 (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256:NO) for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:17:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk1-f170.google.com with SMTP id l136so926vke.2 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:17:52 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87lg2l4d2g.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> 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" To: Keith David Bershatsky , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi there; Agreed, hiding properties entirely seems overkill and quite limited in use cases. However, I think this stems from a more general need to hide properties that are irrelevant to the user=E2=80=94for instance, UIDs created by ox-icalendar, or other internal properties. As a user, I see no need whatsoever to see=E2=80=94let alone edit=E2=80=94such a propert= y, and feel that it clutters the display. Assuming that properties are edited using the suitable commands, no clash would be created by having a set P of properties such that drawers with only P-properties would be hidden. What do you think? Cheers; M. On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 08:38, Nicolas Goaziou wrot= e: > > Hello, > > Keith David Bershatsky writes: > > > A few years ago, I wrote up an answer to my own question on > > Stackoverflow to completely hide the :PROPERTIES: drawer, including > > the line that says :PROPERTIES:. Since then, it has received nearly > > 5,000 views, 11 stars, 17 upvotes on the initial question, and 15 > > upvotes on the answer. > > > > Today, a forum participant posted a comment underneath my answer asking= why not send this upstream. So, here is the link to the answer: > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/a/17492723/2112489 > > Thank you for the suggestion. > > However, I think hiding completely stuff from the user is not great. How > would you edit it, or even know there are properties there? > > You can write ":properties:" instead of ":PROPERTIES:", dim them with an > appropriate face=E2=80=A6 > > Regards, > > -- > Nicolas Goaziou >