From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Standardized code block keywords
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:38:53 +0200
Message-ID: <4EA6D80D.8030001@christianmoe.com>
References: <87pqhrih3s.fsf@gmail.com> <80obx6vniu.fsf@somewhere.org>
	<87vcrdyfhy.fsf@gmail.com> <201110250914.29233.DanielBausch@gmx.de>
	<80zkgptrm0.fsf@somewhere.org> <87ipnd3zbr.fsf@gmail.com>
Reply-To: mail@christianmoe.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33661)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1RIj30-0000Ny-SR
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:36:15 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1RIj2z-00030z-GG
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:36:14 -0400
Received: from b1.hitrost.net ([91.185.211.67]:45390)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@christianmoe.com>) id 1RIj2z-0002uz-BF
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:36:13 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87ipnd3zbr.fsf@gmail.com>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Eric Schulte <schulte.eric@gmail.com>
Cc: Sebastien Vauban <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org


> Surprisingly (to me) srcname is the winner here, but luckily I haven't
> yet voted, and although I would have though #+source: would have been
> the winner I like the simplicity of using #+name: for named code blocks
> as well as named data.

Ditto -- it just wasn't on the table yet when I cast my vote.

Christian