emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Marco Wahl <marcowahlsoft@gmail.com>
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Document level property drawer
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 23:24:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <84imogzd6q.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: HE1PR02MB3033A07E71B19D33A00B235EDA6E0@HE1PR02MB3033.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com

Gustav Wikström <gustav@whil.se> writes:

[...]

> Sooo, a separate branch is created in the Org mode repository named
> "next". I'm not entirely sure how we're supposed to work with it. But
> I've anyways pushed my (non-breaking) patch there.

Okay, thanks.  I try to follow the development on the 'next' branch.

[...]

>> Noteworthy observations AFAICT:
>>
>> 1. I could not translate my personal "#+TODO: . N ~ | x c g >" into a
>> respective :TODO: property.
>
> Yes, that's true. The reason is that there is no TODO-property that
> fits in property drawers right now. I.e. special properties such as
> TODO, TAGS, priority, scheduling and deadlines that have special
> syntax for the outline still have no defined meaning for outline level
> 0. I ofc. think that's an oversight ;) But I may also be a bit crazy.
>
> A conclusion to draw from that, that may be worth writing more about,
> is that the property drawer for node level 0 will not be able to
> replace all file-level keywords that exist today.  Only properties that
> currently can also be defined in property drawers in the outline will
> work in the property drawer on level 0.  Makes sense?

Absolutely.

> The idea I had for all the other keywords that apply for the whole
> file was to create another drawer, what I called a settings drawer.
> Because the TODO-keyword you refer to above really is a setting that
> you're making for the current file, much the same as when you make
> changes in global, folder local or file local variables using the
> standard emacs framework.

The idea of a settings drawer makes sense AFAICS.

For the special case of TODO-keywords one could think about defining
them per subtree.  Possibly there are some low hanging fruit among the
whole-file-properties that have a natural interpretation per subtree.

> I've attached an investigation I did of the world of Org mode
> keywords. It was done quite a while back and some things in there are
> subjective and may not represent my current picture of the "ideal".
> Nonetheless, maybe an interesting read for the ... other crazy people
> out there?

Okay, I'll have a look at your investigation. ;)

BTW this document looks great to me at the first glance.


Thanks,
-- 
Marco

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-22 21:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-20  2:28 [RFC] Document level property drawer Gustav Wikström
2019-10-22 21:24 ` Marco Wahl [this message]
2019-10-23  8:43 ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-23  8:59   ` Gustav Wikström
2019-10-24 21:01   ` Gustav Wikström
2019-10-25 12:58     ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-23 16:08 ` Adam Porter
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-10-24 22:29 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-06  6:02 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-06  5:35 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-05 18:20 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-06  0:51 ` Adam Porter
2019-10-02 20:29 Gustav Wikström
2019-09-30 22:09 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-03 18:31 ` Adam Porter
2019-10-04 10:38   ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-06  1:01     ` Adam Porter
2019-10-07  7:46       ` Marco Wahl
2019-09-29 10:27 Gustav Wikström
2019-09-29 19:13 ` Marco Wahl
2019-09-30 16:01 ` Adam Porter
2019-09-30 20:46   ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-01 12:38     ` Sebastian Miele
2020-01-13 21:52       ` Marco Wahl
2020-01-15  8:18         ` Sebastian Miele
2020-02-01 19:59           ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-01 13:55     ` Adam Porter
2019-10-02 10:29       ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-03 18:06         ` Adam Porter
2019-10-04 11:05           ` Marco Wahl
2019-10-06  1:05             ` Adam Porter
2019-10-06  5:10               ` Matt Price
2019-10-15 17:49 ` Gustav Wikström
2019-10-16  0:48   ` Adam Porter
2019-10-16  9:48   ` Marco Wahl

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.orgmode.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=84imogzd6q.fsf@gmail.com \
    --to=marcowahlsoft@gmail.com \
    --cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).