From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Leech-Pepin Subject: Re: are super-hidden technical blocks required? Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:23:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20120730144259.GA1017@nausicaa.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50439) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Svrob-0004dV-St for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:23:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Svroa-0007D8-Nf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:23:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:52349) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Svroa-0007Ct-GT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 11:23:24 -0400 Received: by pbbrp2 with SMTP id rp2so10956204pbb.0 for ; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:23:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120730144259.GA1017@nausicaa.localdomain> 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: Ivy Foster Cc: Org Mode Mailing List Hi, On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Ivy Foster wrote: > On 30 Jul 2012, at 11:26 am +0900, Torsten Wagner wrote: >> Hi, > > Hi, > >> [Because of the problems of syncing and interaction with >> third-party programs] I was wondering if it would be time >> to switch org-mode from text to some sort of XML. > > I mostly lurk on this list, but reading the preceding > proposal I figured I should note that, as a user, one of the > key features of org-mode is its lovely simplicity of syntax > and interface. If I really wanted to keep my files in > hand-hacked or generated XML, I could, but I'd much rather > keep 'em in, well, org (-: . > >> Would it help [alleviate the problem of property-blocks >> containing mixed user & technical data] to introduce a >> technical-property block which only contains information >> intend to be used by other programs and parsers? > > Sounds like an interesting idea. It sounds interesting however my first instinct is that it will not be easy to make the distinctions. Is :ID: meant as technical-data or user-data? Columns and Archive properties are more 'technical', yet they are for use by Org. With the new exporter/org-element you retrieve the properties using =org-element-property= so the unneeded properties don't need to be parsed by the exporters. >> This blocks could be hidden under all normal means unlike >> really someone want to see them and hit a special >> key-combo. > > Hmm, personally I'd rather have it visible but clearly > labeled. Transparency is nearly always a good thing. > Agreed. If it's there I'd want to know it was there. the :ARCHIVED: tag does well enough at keeping content hidden for that purpose, but you still see that it is present. (So just don't open the drawer unless you need it.) > It's great that you're thinking about this stuff, and I'll > look forward to seeing where these ideas go. > > Cheers, > iff > Regards, Jon