Re: Org-mode syntax as a tool-independent MIME type

[Karl Voit <devnull@Karl-Voit.at>]

Hi Bastien,

* Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi Karl and Timothy,
>
> thank you Karl for reviving this important topic.
>
> I think our collective priority should be to work on
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-synxtax.html so that it reflects the
> current Org syntax.  Hopefully we can do this before Org 9.6.  As
> discussed with TEC, we can factor out suggestions from this document
> so that it is not a mix of facts and hypotheses.

A valid approach.

I think we do have two different approaches ongoing here. With OD1 I
tried to come up with a minimal set of Org-mode syntax elements that
are very easy to implement in non-Emacs tools in order to get an
easy intro to this universe. This is a bottom-up approach.

Defining the whole Org-mode syntax as you've suggested is a complete
definition of Orgdown (or OD∞ as of
https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Orgdown-Levels.org
) which is a top-down approach.

So far, I don´t see a conflict here. This may arise with OD2, OD3,
... definitions if they will ever exist.

> Then we can work on suggestions for evolutions of the current Org-mode
> syntax chunk by chunk, as a long-term goal for stabilizing changes for
> Org 10 (2023 ?)

Sounds great!

> What occurred to me while rereading this thread is that definining a
> syntax for a IETF RFC on an Org mimetype probably needs to be done not
> just by this Emacs Org-mode community, but by bringing together other
> "consumers" of .org files, from ecosystems outside of Emacs.
>
> Such a collective work could lead to define what subset of the Org
> syntax is useful as the corner-stone for .org files everywhere - which
> is what you rightfully brought up with "Orgdown".

I tried to collect projects on
https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool-Support.org

> If successful, such a process could end up in defining the minimal and
> official "Org syntax" while allowing implementations (like the one for
> Emacs org-mode) to supercharge this syntax if deemed useful.

To me, this sound aligned with the idea of OD levels OD1 and OD∞.

> Perhaps TEC is right and we will end up having the minimal syntax
> being the one we currently use for Org-mode: we'll see.
>
> But we need volunteers: one to work on worg/dev/org-synxtax.org (I'm
> assuming TEC can lead the work here) and one to set up a discussion
> with people implementing Org in various places (you ?).

What kind of discussion is on your mind? At the moment, I tend to
think that the Org-mode community should provide directions by
developing a formal definition of the syntax and maybe later-on
define viable sub-sets (the OD levels?) so that tool developers
don't have to implement the whole large thing.

At this stage, I don't know what discussions you're trying to start
here. Can you elaborate?

> I suggest to take this sequentially and not tackle the second work
> before we're done with the first one.

I interpret this as "discussions with tool developers after working
on the formal Org definition". This would be my understanding and
also my thought.

-- 
get mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML into Org-mode:
       > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs <
Personal Information Management > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/pim/
Emacs-related > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/emacs/