From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lechtenboerger Subject: Re: [PATCH] Derive non-default start value for ordered list Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 20:15:49 +0100 Message-ID: <874kyio7x6.fsf@informationelle-selbstbestimmung-im-internet.de> References: <87r21nvkq5.fsf@informationelle-selbstbestimmung-im-internet.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38329) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ibrB9-0000Pt-IL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:16:17 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ibrB1-0006CV-SH for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:16:11 -0500 Received: from mx2.mailbox.org ([80.241.60.215]:46897) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ibrB0-00066B-FV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2019 14:16:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Samuel Wales's message of "Sun, 1 Dec 2019 14:13:24 -0700") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Samuel Wales Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 2019-12-01, at 14:13, Samuel Wales wrote: > i think it might be partlly a question of whether these numbers are > fixed things that refer to fixed items [like referring to sections in > a law that is not in the document] vs. being used to continue lists. > > they are both legitimate uses. in the first case, the @ syntax makes > sense to me, because it specifies a fixed alphanumber. yes i made > that word up. > > some exporters assume the numbers in the org source list don't matter > and start from 1 or the @ in the exported text. If I took the effort to type something, then that should not be ignored by an exporter. > so your solution would be anomalous. But meet some users=E2=80=99 expectations. Quite likely, those of new Org users. > and i'm used to exporters doing that so it feels strange to me to rely > on the org text. If text is ignored, I should not need to type it in the first place. > i view that as potentially changing. what should > occur if you do something that renumbers it? If I renumber, then, of course, I want to see the new numbers after export. > in the second case, the @ syntax and your solution both seem brittle > to me. you might add to the first list. I agree. > i think there can be a third solution that would be less brittle. > > just as a brainstorm, consider the common case of continued lists like > > vvv > 1. asdf > 2. <> asdf > > a paragraph. > > 3. [@asdf-list-end] asdf > ^^^ This would indeed be a cool solution. Thanks Jens