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: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 22:46:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <84tv8tjywm.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 87eezxrcwv.fsf@alphapapa.net

Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes:

> Gustav Wikström <gustav@whil.se> writes:
>
>> 3) Properties defined in a property drawer will have precedence over
>>    properties defined as a property keyword, if the same property is
>>    defined using both conventions.
>
> That protocol seems unnatural and confusing to me:
>
> - If precedence were to be defined by something other than file-order,
>   it seems to me that those defined with #+ keywords should have
>   precedence, because they are more visible, while those in drawers are
>   hidden.
> - However, it seems to me that the simplest, most natural protocol would
>   be for later declarations to override earlier ones.

I think it would be quite natural to use the tree structure of Org.  A
property setting in a subtree overrides the setting in a parent (which
could be the document(= the whole file.))

>> 4) The position for the document level property drawer is:
>>    - At the first line in a file that is not a comment or a keyword.
>>
>>      I.e. the following will work:
>>
>>      #+begin_src org
>>        # -*- mode: org -*-
>>        ,#+TITLE: Test
>>        :PROPERTIES:
>>        :CATEGORY: Test
>>        :END:
>>
>>        Preamble
>>
>>        ,* Some heading
>>        Some content
>>      #+end_src

[...]

> That feels unintuitive to me.  Document-level property keywords may
> appear anywhere in a file, so it seems inconsistent for document-level
> property drawers to be limited in this way, as if there were an implied
> headline at the top of the file.  If it were so, I would expect to see
> many mailing list posts by users asking why the properties defined in
> their document-level property drawers aren't working.  Given that there
> is no enforcement in Org's UI to keep such drawers in certain places, I
> think the implementation should be tolerant of users' preferences and
> mistakes (cf. Postel's Law).

TBH allowing document-level properties anywhere in an Org file looks
rather messy to me.  When a user is interested in all the document-level
properties she needs to scan the whole file.  Also the spread out
document-level properties introduce a distinction between a whole Org
file and an Org subtree.

I think the distinction between Org file and Org subtree should be kept
to a minimum.  Wouldn't it be nice if Org files can be considered as Org
subtrees?  In this sense a property drawer for the document is a step in
the right direction.


Ciao,
--
Marco

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-30 20:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-29 10:27 [RFC] Document level property drawer Gustav Wikström
2019-09-29 19:13 ` Marco Wahl
2019-09-30 16:01 ` Adam Porter
2019-09-30 20:46   ` Marco Wahl [this message]
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
2020-01-20  3:27 ` [Question] adding document global properties drawer stardiviner
2020-01-21 16:40   ` Nicolas Goaziou
2020-01-22 16:28     ` stardiviner
2020-01-24 23:14       ` Nicolas Goaziou
2020-02-23  7:31         ` [SOLVED] " stardiviner
2020-02-23 13:14           ` Bastien
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-09-30 22:09 [RFC] Document level property drawer 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
2019-10-02 20:29 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-05 18:20 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-06  0:51 ` Adam Porter
2019-10-06  5:35 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-06  6:02 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-20  2:28 Gustav Wikström
2019-10-22 21:24 ` Marco Wahl
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
2019-10-24 22:29 Gustav Wikström

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=84tv8tjywm.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).