On Tue, Dec 27, 2022 at 02:15:26PM +0000, abq@bitrot.link wrote:
> Another idea:
> 
> Your example was:
> 
>   * General animals
>     Some text about general animals
> 
>   ** arthropods
>      spiders and things
> 
>   * -
>     More about animals in general
> 
>   ** vertebrates
>      so-and-so
> 
> 
> But to express your intended meaning, how about this instead:
> 
>   * General animals
>     Some text about general animals
> 
>   ** arthropods
>      spiders and things
> 
>   ** -
>     More about animals in general
> 
>   ** vertebrates
>      so-and-so

Hm. To me, it would be less intuitive (the material under this
pseudo heading is intended to be level 1, not 2). So you might
like to add this to the costs. Or not, if that doesn't make
sense to you :)

> IMO, the benefits outweigh the costs, because the benefits prevent problems
> with editing when using current software, and the costs only cause problems
> with viewing and navigation.
> 
> Future versions of Org could:
> Skip numbering of lone-dash sections.
> Skip folding them when folding subsections.
> Skip them when jumping to next/previous section.
> Display them at one level shallower than currently standard in
> org-indent-mode, and maybe omit display of the lone-dash line itself.
> 
> 
> BTW, this would be another reason to use a character other than dash,
> because you already use dash for an incompatible meaning.

Don't count my use case. It is well localised, and shouldn't interfere
with a choice of character. You had one more compelling downside of
dash (for dot: perhaps it looks too much like the ellipsis of a folded
subsection). I actually liked the comma, which has already a job as
an escape-character for line constructs in Org.

But we are already bikeshedding: I'd leave that for when you have
enough users. Two people bikeshedding isn't enough fun :)

Cheers
-- 
t