From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org> Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id +Wt6Ad1pnl9DeQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from <emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:55:09 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id CPzbONxpnl8HKQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from <emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) for <larch@yhetil.org>; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 07:55:08 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6568B9403CD for <larch@yhetil.org>; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 07:55:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:56412 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org>) id 1kZ8Ce-00028e-9x for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 02:55:04 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40038) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <theophilusx@gmail.com>) id 1kZ8Bn-00028K-A1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 02:54:11 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]:34745) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <theophilusx@gmail.com>) id 1kZ8Bk-0000dN-Pq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 02:54:11 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id r3so5230983plo.1 for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 00:54:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=references:user-agent:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:date :mime-version; bh=/0FmcU5H0Jl8OczooKWK7vsVoIbFyekJTS+vO20GEU4=; b=TW9Pw7DqkXnq2AxJYg3LTUs4w71kqyTtMY3WJUBGR0pH5VBccG+TfDpkQXh+4UQ0uM tuq9whXuIFccnRWGYKWcrjI5p53GpNXcTCmUaRWmolOkyMpQ3Wl+zQnm4UnnFntcZWsw xoRDj+uPAZvq+VUEO0gIF3hpSEV6IEO+AyfiTylpz9wxNav6lIGTeFZvdRi/Y61TKVUl /ezO/bKUrgah/0gYF0PuMRagH/LMW3uckeOURflbK8btyo7oyOb7/FYID3shLTT5jqkd viGdx4M2AXpJ2hfR1WNnG0osqZyFhmKZQqimZUtd8ZCHJ/m5ZeMDGkh3rXUvaIMClzCq PDIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:subject :in-reply-to:message-id:date:mime-version; bh=/0FmcU5H0Jl8OczooKWK7vsVoIbFyekJTS+vO20GEU4=; b=JgXsMeDXvfc0/VvTWbB0z+I2MtNVa1YYTB1V+4b03N/gJ+Ypyy0nLE4QVQlTgt74Cp PXBFS+FZN7l0dVJiWk4839ghHrtLgBq0YLQy9gtZZ53d9bHhKKguYy+FNqMl9MtJ2X2S 49YrHvhel3OEjVfE2z0ddyZSUehVEiuN7oiPWs1lk1bUIagvdBtbajN5gou1x1/NozX3 y/aFASERnWww/sm0VaTZw/+3X9CYMbR5YGoAYh/4iOeQl/aEHDeURmKxXDjhmKwAkm52 Kk2vVRW9QxNm4SrJvrNykWAdfKbY+te9tGq6Oj7zEKCCGQS/oF1EMX1PgeJCK1wHuFFC 8aCA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5301jUzht9UwhTFlQ8p1FXu0iXibLakwjxqSszuWC5jOFyDpgJNc 5rOoeSHbWF6I2qWSKiEPuM8e6Zx2ZoaDKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+pVDXUoZo1j5v8vWUOyJJOIVqPj21Kutd90hTn/H09cBlW9x9w7Q67k3aPvc76PggpzQt6g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b283:b029:d6:b2a7:3913 with SMTP id u3-20020a170902b283b02900d6b2a73913mr7024579plr.54.1604217247082; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 00:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tim-desktop (106-69-155-166.dyn.iinet.net.au. [106.69.155.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t10sm8361288pjr.37.2020.11.01.00.54.05 for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 01 Nov 2020 00:54:06 -0700 (PDT) References: <CANKzsSBja5GNHWu0VEvH9dSu_vWFhiLyoebTT3GdT_Jc4gxKaw@mail.gmail.com> <87361tgb96.fsf@web.de> <CANKzsSB-8ZdKHomFeXHT8LBJftz4K27uOk64+XGHwZJEPkbzqw@mail.gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.5.6; emacs 27.1.50 From: Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com> To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: Thoughts on the standardization of Org In-reply-to: <CANKzsSB-8ZdKHomFeXHT8LBJftz4K27uOk64+XGHwZJEPkbzqw@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <875z6pms11.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2020 18:54:02 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f; envelope-from=theophilusx@gmail.com; helo=mail-pl1-x62f.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list 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: <https://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+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" <emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org> X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=TW9Pw7Dq; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.71 X-TUID: U09ZsrAVsyqM Asa Zeren <asaizeren@gmail.com> writes: > > In these concerns I see one major flaw. The way they are worded at present > implies that the Emacs implementation of org is the "one true implementation," > and that all tools in other environments are auxiliary. I believe that if we > want org to grow, then it needs to become unbound from Emacs. It should become a > universal markup format, which just happens to have had many tools first > implemented for Emacs (even if Emacs still will probably remain the best way to > edit org files). > I think the above is likely the biggest point of disagreement amongst many org users. Org is not simply a different markup language. Org-mode is primarily and Emacs mode to help organise *things*. The fact non-Emacs users have seen it, like it and wish it was available outside of emacs is great, but for me, not a significant objective. Anything which took org-mode out of Emacs or made non-Emacs requirements a higher priority than the on-going development of the mode in Emacs would be misplaced. For me and I suspect many others, the ability for non-Emacs users to work with org files is a 'nice to have', but not a key objective. The main objective is to make org-mode an even more useful and powerful Emacs package. I do over 90% of my work from within Emacs - writing this email, browsing documentation, writing code in various languages, developing software requirement documentation, writing user manuals, interacting with version control, compiling, testing software, working with databases, tracking tasks and time, invoicing clients, planning and managing projects, appointments etc. About the only things I don't do with Emacs are general web browsing (because I need Javascript support), playing music (though I can do this from Emacs as well) and playing the occasional game. The old cliche about open source is that it is about scratching your own itch. For many org-mode users, that means configuring and extending org-mode as an Emacs package. I suspect this is part of the reason there are few org-mode tools outside of Emacs. Many of those which do exist seem to be more oriented towards minimal org-mode support on platforms where Emacs cannot run (or run easily), like mobile devices. There are other efforts to bring org-mode into other editors, like vscode, but the lack of a powerful elisp equivalent (particularly one with all the editor oriented support of elisp) makes the effort prohibitive. In many respects, the real 'genius' of org-mode was that it took many of the separate features and existing functions of Emacs and elisp, wrapped them all up in a consistent interface called org-mode. Many of the features and much of the functionality which makes up org-mode existed in Emacs before org-mode was developed (folding, overlays, font-lock, inferior process buffers, latex fragment previews, hyperlinks, encryption, networking, etc.). To implement all of this on another platform is a large job. Even editors which support many of these individual features can't easily achieve the same level of integration because those features are implemented as distinct modules and lack the consistent extensible power of elisp. I'm sorry if all of this and other responses seem too negative. The desire to bring org-mode to non-Emacs users is a worthy goal, but I fear the size of the task is too large. What may be feasible are stand-alone org-mode parses which can make up parts of tool chains for limited processing of org files and perhaps basic org-mode modules for other editors which enable basic editing of org files. Tim