* [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target?
@ 2014-03-21 21:38 Bastien
2014-03-21 21:41 ` Samuel Wales
2014-03-22 9:31 ` Christian Moe
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bastien @ 2014-03-21 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-orgmode
Hi all,
the subject says it all -- see this thread for reference:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/83648
Would you be okay if radio targets like <<<radio target>>>
are limited to plain text?
Thanks for your feedback,
--
Bastien
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target?
2014-03-21 21:38 [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target? Bastien
@ 2014-03-21 21:41 ` Samuel Wales
2014-03-22 9:31 ` Christian Moe
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Wales @ 2014-03-21 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bastien; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
imo radio targets are fundamentally limited because they only work in
the same file, while org has become a multi-file mode. i am ok with
cosmetic limitations in addition.
--
The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
The disease DOES progress. MANY people have died from it. And
ANYBODY can get it.
Denmark: free Karina Hansen NOW.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target?
2014-03-21 21:38 [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target? Bastien
2014-03-21 21:41 ` Samuel Wales
@ 2014-03-22 9:31 ` Christian Moe
2014-03-22 11:07 ` Nicolas Goaziou
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Christian Moe @ 2014-03-22 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bastien; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
Excluding special entities would not interfere with anything I've done
with radio targets so far. I can imagine future uses, but probably
nothing I couldn't work around with Unicode.
But is this only about special entities, or about all Org syntax,
including subscripts/superscripts, emphasis...? That would be
limiting. As long as radio targets are visible parts of the text, I'd
like them to continue supporting such markup.
Yours,
Christian
Bastien writes:
> Hi all,
>
> the subject says it all -- see this thread for reference:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/83648
>
> Would you be okay if radio targets like <<<radio target>>>
> are limited to plain text?
>
> Thanks for your feedback,
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target?
2014-03-22 9:31 ` Christian Moe
@ 2014-03-22 11:07 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-03-23 7:26 ` Christian Moe
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Goaziou @ 2014-03-22 11:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Moe; +Cc: Bastien, emacs-orgmode
Hello,
Christian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com> writes:
> But is this only about special entities, or about all Org syntax,
the latter.
> including subscripts/superscripts, emphasis...? That would be
> limiting. As long as radio targets are visible parts of the text, I'd
> like them to continue supporting such markup.
So far, radio targets only support entities, subscript and superscript.
Emphasis is not supported. I don't think it's a limitation, though,
because radio targets can be contained within emphasis markup.
Regards,
--
Nicolas Goaziou
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target?
2014-03-22 11:07 ` Nicolas Goaziou
@ 2014-03-23 7:26 ` Christian Moe
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Christian Moe @ 2014-03-23 7:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nicolas Goaziou; +Cc: Bastien, emacs-orgmode
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Christian Moe <...> writes:
>
>> But is this only about special entities, or about all Org syntax,
>
> the latter.
Thanks for clarifying.
>> including subscripts/superscripts, emphasis...? That would be
>> limiting. As long as radio targets are visible parts of the text, I'd
>> like them to continue supporting such markup.
>
> So far, radio targets only support entities, subscript and superscript.
> Emphasis is not supported. I don't think it's a limitation, though,
> because radio targets can be contained within emphasis markup.
Sorry, I overlooked that. So both under the status quo and under the
proposed change, emphasis is possible. Mixed emphasis/non-emphasis
within the target (e.g. <<<creation /ex nihilo/>>>) is not supported in
either case, so the change would not further limit use of emphasis.
It would be nice to keep support for subscripts and superscripts,
though. One might want to use, say, "CO_2" in a radio target.
But this is not a pressing concern on my part, since I don't rely on
radio targets for anything very important anyway.
Yours,
Christian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-03-23 7:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-03-21 21:38 [POLL] Do you need special entities in radio target? Bastien
2014-03-21 21:41 ` Samuel Wales
2014-03-22 9:31 ` Christian Moe
2014-03-22 11:07 ` Nicolas Goaziou
2014-03-23 7:26 ` Christian Moe
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).