About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Sebastien Vauban]

#+TITLE:     Properties
#+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban

#+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
#+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2

* Abstract

IIUC, properties are set in this way:

- on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
- on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.

My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
and should be ignored if that would happen.

The following example shows that either:

- I'm wrong to think so,
- there is a bug.

What is the right assumption here?

* Subtree

Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:

#+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
#+PROPERTY: var+ world"

Though, they're well taken into account:

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
  foo
#+end_src

#+results:
: Hello world

These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
without any =+=):

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
  (+ foo bar)
#+end_src

returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Eric Schulte]

"Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

> #+TITLE:     Properties
> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>
> * Abstract
>
> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>
> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>
> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>

While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.

Best -- Eric

>
> The following example shows that either:
>
> - I'm wrong to think so,
> - there is a bug.
>
> What is the right assumption here?
>
> * Subtree
>
> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>
> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>
> Though, they're well taken into account:
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   foo
> #+end_src
>
> #+results:
> : Hello world
>
> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
> without any =+=):
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>   (+ foo bar)
> #+end_src
>
> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."
>
> Best regards,
>   Seb

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Eric and all,

Eric Schulte wrote:
> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf-geNee64TY+gS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>
>> * Abstract
>>
>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>
>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>
>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>
> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.

I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
question...

Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
expected *semantics* of such a construct?

There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
line inside a subtree...

- ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
- ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
- ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree

Best regards,
  Seb

>> The following example shows that either:
>>
>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>> - there is a bug.
>>
>> What is the right assumption here?
>>
>> * Subtree
>>
>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>
>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>
>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>
>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>   foo
>> #+end_src
>>
>> #+results:
>> : Hello world
>>
>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>> without any =+=):
>>
>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>   (+ foo bar)
>> #+end_src
>>
>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."

-- 
Sebastien Vauban

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Eric Schulte]

"Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:

> Hi Eric and all,
>
> Eric Schulte wrote:
>> "Sebastien Vauban" <wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com> writes:
>>
>>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>>
>>> * Abstract
>>>
>>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>>
>>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>>
>>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>>
>> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
>> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.
>
> I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
> question...
>
> Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
> expected *semantics* of such a construct?
>
> There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
> line inside a subtree...
>
> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
> - ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree
>

I agree this is murky and whatever behavior we want should be clearly
thought out and documented in the manual.  I would argue that you missed
another possible semantics, the simple semantics which are currently
implemented in which a property line *anywhere* in a buffer sets a
global property.

Cheers,

>
> Best regards,
>   Seb
>
>>> The following example shows that either:
>>>
>>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>>> - there is a bug.
>>>
>>> What is the right assumption here?
>>>
>>> * Subtree
>>>
>>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>>
>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>>
>>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>>
>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>   foo
>>> #+end_src
>>>
>>> #+results:
>>> : Hello world
>>>
>>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>>> without any =+=):
>>>
>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>   (+ foo bar)
>>> #+end_src
>>>
>>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Torsten Wagner]

Hmm...
but this point is really interesting at least worse to write down in the 
manual.
 From my understanding a
#+PROPERTY: var bar=2
sets bar globally to 2
somewhere and many lines and headers later
#+PROPERTY: var bar=5
would change this value to 5 for either the rest of the file or until a 
new assignment is given...
in that way a property line would be an tree-independent global variable

in contrast, a property-block is only valid of the given tree (and 
subtrees?).

This brings up the question if there is a need for

#+PROPERTY: const bar=2

which would behave exactly the same like var but issue an error message 
if someone tries to set it again somewhere in the file.

Torsten



On 01/06/2012 04:28 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>
>> Hi Eric and all,
>>
>> Eric Schulte wrote:
>>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>>
>>>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>>>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>>>
>>>> * Abstract
>>>>
>>>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>>>
>>>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>>>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>>>
>>>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>>>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>>>
>>> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
>>> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.
>>
>> I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
>> question...
>>
>> Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
>> expected *semantics* of such a construct?
>>
>> There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
>> line inside a subtree...
>>
>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
>> - ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree
>>
>
> I agree this is murky and whatever behavior we want should be clearly
> thought out and documented in the manual.  I would argue that you missed
> another possible semantics, the simple semantics which are currently
> implemented in which a property line *anywhere* in a buffer sets a
> global property.
>
> Cheers,
>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>    Seb
>>
>>>> The following example shows that either:
>>>>
>>>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>>>> - there is a bug.
>>>>
>>>> What is the right assumption here?
>>>>
>>>> * Subtree
>>>>
>>>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>>>
>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>>>
>>>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>>>
>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>    foo
>>>> #+end_src
>>>>
>>>> #+results:
>>>> : Hello world
>>>>
>>>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>>>> without any =+=):
>>>>
>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>    (+ foo bar)
>>>> #+end_src
>>>>
>>>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."
>

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[cberry]

Torsten Wagner <torsten.wagner@gmail.com> writes:

> Hmm...
> but this point is really interesting at least worse to write down in
> the manual.
> From my understanding a
> #+PROPERTY: var bar=2
> sets bar globally to 2
> somewhere and many lines and headers later
> #+PROPERTY: var bar=5
> would change this value to 5 for either the rest of the file or until
> a new assignment is given...

I think the behavior is trickier than that.

This file:

,----
| #+property: var  foo=1
| #+property: var+ bar=2
| 
| #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
|   (+ foo bar)
| #+end_src
| 
| #+property: var foo=10
| #+property: var+ bar=20
| 
| 
| #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
|   (+ foo bar)
| #+end_src
`----

Yields '30' after each block upon C-c C-e A, suggesting it is the last
#+property setting the global property.

But this one:

,----
| #+property: var  foo=1
| #+property: var+ bar=2
| 
| #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
|   (+ foo bar)
| #+end_src
| 
| #+property: var foo=10
| 
| #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
|   (+ foo bar)
| #+end_src
`----

Yields '3' after each block.

So the global behavior of the second 'var foo' line depends on there
baing a subsequent 'var+' line.

Is this really the expected behavior?

(Org-mode version 7.8.03)

Chuck


> in that way a property line would be an tree-independent global variable
>
> in contrast, a property-block is only valid of the given tree (and
> subtrees?).
>
> This brings up the question if there is a need for
>
> #+PROPERTY: const bar=2
>
> which would behave exactly the same like var but issue an error
> message if someone tries to set it again somewhere in the file.
>
> Torsten
>
>
>
> On 01/06/2012 04:28 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>
>>> Hi Eric and all,
>>>
>>> Eric Schulte wrote:
>>>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>>>
>>>>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>>>>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>>>>
>>>>> * Abstract
>>>>>
>>>>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>>>>
>>>>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>>>>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>>>>
>>>>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>>>>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>>>>
>>>> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
>>>> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.
>>>
>>> I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
>>> question...
>>>
>>> Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
>>> expected *semantics* of such a construct?
>>>
>>> There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
>>> line inside a subtree...
>>>
>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
>>> - ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree
>>>
>>
>> I agree this is murky and whatever behavior we want should be clearly
>> thought out and documented in the manual.  I would argue that you missed
>> another possible semantics, the simple semantics which are currently
>> implemented in which a property line *anywhere* in a buffer sets a
>> global property.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>    Seb
>>>
>>>>> The following example shows that either:
>>>>>
>>>>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>>>>> - there is a bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the right assumption here?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Subtree
>>>>>
>>>>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>>>>
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>>>>
>>>>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>>>>
>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>    foo
>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>
>>>>> #+results:
>>>>> : Hello world
>>>>>
>>>>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>>>>> without any =+=):
>>>>>
>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>    (+ foo bar)
>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>
>>>>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Eric Schulte]

Torsten Wagner <torsten.wagner@gmail.com> writes:

> Hmm...
> but this point is really interesting at least worse to write down in the 
> manual.
>  From my understanding a
> #+PROPERTY: var bar=2
> sets bar globally to 2
> somewhere and many lines and headers later
> #+PROPERTY: var bar=5
> would change this value to 5 for either the rest of the file or until a 
> new assignment is given...
> in that way a property line would be an tree-independent global variable
>

Two points here.
1) currently #+property: lines are global and affect the entire file
   regardless of where they are located in the file, there is no notion
   of different values before or after a particular #+property: line.
   So in the case above I would expect the var property to have the
   value bar=5 as the later line will most likely overwrite the former
   line.

2) there is nothing special about the "var" property which could make it
   behave differently than other properties.

>
> in contrast, a property-block is only valid of the given tree (and
> subtrees?).
>

true

>
> This brings up the question if there is a need for
>
> #+PROPERTY: const bar=2
>
> which would behave exactly the same like var but issue an error message 
> if someone tries to set it again somewhere in the file.
>

No, currently *all* properties are set in the same way regardless of
their name, and I think this is a simplification worth keeping.

Best,

>
> Torsten
>
>
>
> On 01/06/2012 04:28 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>
>>> Hi Eric and all,
>>>
>>> Eric Schulte wrote:
>>>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>>>
>>>>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>>>>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>>>>
>>>>> * Abstract
>>>>>
>>>>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>>>>
>>>>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>>>>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>>>>
>>>>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>>>>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>>>>
>>>> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
>>>> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.
>>>
>>> I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
>>> question...
>>>
>>> Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
>>> expected *semantics* of such a construct?
>>>
>>> There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
>>> line inside a subtree...
>>>
>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
>>> - ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree
>>>
>>
>> I agree this is murky and whatever behavior we want should be clearly
>> thought out and documented in the manual.  I would argue that you missed
>> another possible semantics, the simple semantics which are currently
>> implemented in which a property line *anywhere* in a buffer sets a
>> global property.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>    Seb
>>>
>>>>> The following example shows that either:
>>>>>
>>>>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>>>>> - there is a bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the right assumption here?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Subtree
>>>>>
>>>>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>>>>
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>>>>
>>>>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>>>>
>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>    foo
>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>
>>>>> #+results:
>>>>> : Hello world
>>>>>
>>>>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>>>>> without any =+=):
>>>>>
>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>    (+ foo bar)
>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>
>>>>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."
>>
>

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/

Re: About the use of PROPERTY "meta lines"...

[Eric Schulte]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1649 bytes --]

cberry@tajo.ucsd.edu writes:

> Torsten Wagner <torsten.wagner@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Hmm...
>> but this point is really interesting at least worse to write down in
>> the manual.
>> From my understanding a
>> #+PROPERTY: var bar=2
>> sets bar globally to 2
>> somewhere and many lines and headers later
>> #+PROPERTY: var bar=5
>> would change this value to 5 for either the rest of the file or until
>> a new assignment is given...
>
> I think the behavior is trickier than that.
>
> This file:
>
> ,----
> | #+property: var  foo=1
> | #+property: var+ bar=2
> | 
> | #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
> |   (+ foo bar)
> | #+end_src
> | 
> | #+property: var foo=10
> | #+property: var+ bar=20
> | 
> | 
> | #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
> |   (+ foo bar)
> | #+end_src
> `----
>
> Yields '30' after each block upon C-c C-e A, suggesting it is the last
> #+property setting the global property.
>

This makes sense

>
> But this one:
>
> ,----
> | #+property: var  foo=1
> | #+property: var+ bar=2
> | 
> | #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
> |   (+ foo bar)
> | #+end_src
> | 
> | #+property: var foo=10
> | 
> | #+begin_src emacs-lisp :results value :exports both
> |   (+ foo bar)
> | #+end_src
> `----
>
> Yields '3' after each block.
>
> So the global behavior of the second 'var foo' line depends on there
> baing a subsequent 'var+' line.
>
> Is this really the expected behavior?
>

No, the above behavior is not expected.  I've just pushed up a patch
which results in the following behavior, in which the last specification
of a property overwrites any previous specifications.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: overwriting-properties.org --]
[-- Type: text/x-org, Size: 181 bytes --]

#+property: something  foo=1
#+property: something+ bar=2
#+property: something foo=10

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
  org-file-properties
#+end_src

#+results:
| (something . foo=10) |


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 3133 bytes --]


Best,

>
> (Org-mode version 7.8.03)
>
> Chuck
>
>
>> in that way a property line would be an tree-independent global variable
>>
>> in contrast, a property-block is only valid of the given tree (and
>> subtrees?).
>>
>> This brings up the question if there is a need for
>>
>> #+PROPERTY: const bar=2
>>
>> which would behave exactly the same like var but issue an error
>> message if someone tries to set it again somewhere in the file.
>>
>> Torsten
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/06/2012 04:28 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
>>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>>
>>>> Hi Eric and all,
>>>>
>>>> Eric Schulte wrote:
>>>>> "Sebastien Vauban"<wxhgmqzgwmuf@spammotel.com>  writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> #+TITLE:     Properties
>>>>>> #+AUTHOR:    Seb Vauban
>>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo=1
>>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ bar=2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Abstract
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IIUC, properties are set in this way:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - on a file basis, before any heading, through the =PROPERTY= keyword,
>>>>>> - on a subtree basis, through the =PROPERTIES= block.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My comprehension is that the =PROPERTY= keyword may not be used inside "trees",
>>>>>> and should be ignored if that would happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> While it is not normal usage, I think that it is legal for #+PROPERTY:
>>>>> lines (or #+Option: lines etc...) to appear inside of subtrees.
>>>>
>>>> I realize this is not especially a Babel question, but more a Org core
>>>> question...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your answer -- which generates a new one, though: what is then the
>>>> expected *semantics* of such a construct?
>>>>
>>>> There are at least 3 different views on such a construct: putting a PROPERTY
>>>> line inside a subtree...
>>>>
>>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the subtree
>>>> - ... resets some values from that point up to the end of the buffer
>>>> - ... defines some values which can have already been by the subtree
>>>>
>>>
>>> I agree this is murky and whatever behavior we want should be clearly
>>> thought out and documented in the manual.  I would argue that you missed
>>> another possible semantics, the simple semantics which are currently
>>> implemented in which a property line *anywhere* in a buffer sets a
>>> global property.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>    Seb
>>>>
>>>>>> The following example shows that either:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - I'm wrong to think so,
>>>>>> - there is a bug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the right assumption here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Subtree
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Being located in a subtree, the following lines are ill-placed IMHO:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var  foo="Hello
>>>>>> #+PROPERTY: var+ world"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Though, they're well taken into account:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>>    foo
>>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #+results:
>>>>>> : Hello world
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These lines have even wiped the definition of =bar= (because of the use of =var=
>>>>>> without any =+=):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
>>>>>>    (+ foo bar)
>>>>>> #+end_src
>>>>>>
>>>>>> returns the error "Symbol's value as variable is void: bar."
>
>

-- 
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/