From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id sDaSO3TFn1+hTAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 08:38:12 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id GL11N3TFn1/fJQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 08:38:12 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A2CB9404C8 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:38:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35378 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZVLv-00089e-BU for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:38:11 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59352) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZVLY-00089V-T5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:37:48 -0500 Received: from grinta.net ([109.74.203.128]:52410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kZVLW-0005DI-OF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 03:37:48 -0500 Received: from black.local (unknown [193.148.18.84]) (Authenticated sender: daniele) by grinta.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04A79EAC7D for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 08:37:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=grinta.net; s=2020; t=1604306264; bh=RAwsHtZULfql3I5/3TozTDfoDPgnUknprgi9VTp1Xl0=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=IKEcSYeVzL+WeHvDsA628QJHeuWmR2jHVnpKLW7RKLVgYvfuHadlv0XgSH1jdDPis +SVmEZL9NswbN4nKjVF8LBziHOylKHGBEwYtw1AyTf3/tBUjYAu5rgso3CgjqRdi1U 13bfc6vpMsZqfZfnBnkwpGVm4aRYR1x7K+GAzGfEUAIDaap4kmz1RQUchtdCKJ65Vz MczsMaSpGGECj/tlVXB3cOle8BKRJx0Czii8FUfIO6lDJiCwVXvPHVIUj1x31rA1ai lkGF6JFIrwLvxsVJC9TmJhfBYMzv/9NAvuAtWZC9rviiyr0fyWAJ+wbtMMvo2O7RPH CqSe4R09i5mVg== Subject: Re: Thoughts on the standardization of Org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org References: <20201101161317.GA6609@maokai> <87imaoekrz.fsf@web.de> From: Daniele Nicolodi Message-ID: <39fb1f8d-4407-9359-ad14-72ae7841fda9@grinta.net> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:37:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87imaoekrz.fsf@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=109.74.203.128; envelope-from=daniele@grinta.net; helo=grinta.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/02 03:37:44 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail (headers rsa verify failed) header.d=grinta.net header.s=2020 header.b=IKEcSYeV; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.01 X-TUID: JoPorbaEhzu4 On 02/11/2020 00:10, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > Daniele Nicolodi writes: >> Maybe the standardization should cover only the "static" parts of Org >> (ie no table formulas, no babel, no agenda, no exporters, etc). However, >> in this case, what is left is little more of a markup language with an >> editor that allows sections folding. You can have this on top of pretty >> much any markup language using Emacs' outline-minor-mode. > > It could become stronger competition for asciidoc by being available in > more places. Why does Org need to compete with asciidoc? I don't see any advantage in fighting with anyone for market share. > Having an acceptance criterion for “supports basic org-mode > presentation” and “can edit org-files without breaking editing in > org-mode” could help adoption. Acceptance criterion for what? Adoption of what? It seems to me that some see a the adoption of a simplified version of the Org markup language outside Emacs and the org-mode implementation as something desirable. However, I don't see what the Org community would gain from that. > That would be the only part I’d really expect from standardization: > There would be a clear-cut point when a tool could claim compatibility > with org level N or by components (i.e. basic presentation, code-blocks, > …). > > Having org-files parsed as html on a VCS-infopage is pretty nice. As explained many times now, you don't a formal specification for this: the specification is the org-mode implementation itself. However, I will not discourage anyone from working on some form of standardization, other than pointing out that IMO it is an exercise with very limited usefulness, impact and future. Cheers, Dan