Re: Support for tagging (special) blocks

["Sébastien Miquel" <sebastien.miquel@posteo.eu>]

Hi,

Ihor Radchenko writes:
 > They do not. Tags are only considered inside headlines. Trying to allow
 > tags outside headlines will require major changes across the whole Org
 > codebase and will still make things incompatible with third party
 > packages, like org-ql. Not to mention the whole new concept for block
 > syntax.

Tags on block do not need to have the same support as headlines tags.
I'm not suggesting they should interact with the agenda or whatnot.
Support could be behind a user option, and consist only of say easy
tag edition, and `#+exclude_tags:` support. With that scope, the
implementation should be fairly simple. As for third party packages,
it is up to them whether to extend their features to tagged blocks ;
in some case it might not make sense.

 > If one wants to add "tags" or other keywords associated with blocks or
 > other Org elements, the right tool to use is affiliated keywords. But
 > note that Org search infrastructure is tailored towards searching
 > headlines.

Two inconvenients with using affiliated keywords.
  1. There would be no uniform treatment with headline tags. In my use,
     I have the same tags on headline and blocks, and I filter the
     export according to them with #+exclude_tags.
  2. They waste too much space. Say I have some 20 short exercices
     (represented by special blocks). Since I dot not display the
     #+end_ line, each of them takes 2 or 3 lines in my screen. If I
     want to tag those using affiliated keywords that makes for a 50%
     or 33% size increase, with very poor readability.

On a slightly related note, I find it quite unfortunate that one
presently cannot make use of the #+begin_ line of special blocks to
set some kind of optional title instead of using #+name or
#+attr_latex. That's a lot of wasted real estate.


-- 
Sébastien Miquel