From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Spiers Subject: Re: FR: source code Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 22:21:47 +0000 Message-ID: <20080109222147.GM18716@atlantic.linksys.moosehall> References: <87bq7w5zp0.fsf@shellarchive.co.uk> <87hchoh0tj.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <20080109175019.GC22499@odin.demosthenes.org> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JCjJ0-0007LX-5H for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:21:50 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JCjIz-0007LK-Im for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:21:49 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCjIz-0007LH-Cs for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:21:49 -0500 Received: from mail.beimborn.com ([70.84.38.100]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JCjIz-0001hb-6y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:21:49 -0500 Received: from mail.beimborn.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.beimborn.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m09MLmGs010650 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:21:48 -0600 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mail.beimborn.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id m09MLl6G010645 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 22:21:48 GMT Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080109175019.GC22499@odin.demosthenes.org> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 11:50:20AM -0600, Russell Adams wrote: > > I definite agree with that. I, too, primarily use org-mode for the > > way things > > look in Emacs. I occasionally export but my main use is within emacs. > > > > Thanks, > > Ed Same here. A legible and easy to type .org format is very important for me. > I guess I'm missing the point. Optional tags to improve syntax > highlighting in code snippets or to improve export wouldn't affect how > your buffers look inside Emacs. You aren't obligated to use them. ;] It *is* possible to simultaneously achieve beautiful clean text with non-obtrusive semantic markup, and keep good flexibility in export format options; reStructuredText is living proof of this: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/ref/rst/introduction.html Compare the following documents: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.html http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.txt I would *love* to see orgmode reuse more of these great ideas. > On the flip side as a frequent exporter, I welcome anything that can > help unobtrusively improve the quality of the output. Adding syntax > highlighting in export, or a simple way to escape code metacharacters > would be of great benefit to me. > > I've recently gotten completely hooked on the Latex exporter. The > ability to turn an org outline from my project notes into a > professional looking PDF with bookmarks is invaluable! All that with > zero time spent formatting on my part. Hear hear, agreed on all accounts!