From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Schulte Subject: Re: [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:28:48 -0600 Message-ID: <87boswk4vj.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87pqhrih3s.fsf@gmail.com> <30891.1319141196@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87fwinifqu.fsf@gmail.com> <32184.1319143892@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87zkgvgxe7.fsf@gmail.com> <1405.1319147324@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87zkgvfhra.fsf@gmail.com> <2127.1319148505@alphaville.dokosmarshall.org> <87vcrjfgt1.fsf@gmail.com> <80sjmmvm60.fsf@somewhere.org> <4EA129DB.4070006@christianmoe.com> <8762ji5jr6.fsf@gmail.com> <4EA1D4F9.5010302@christianmoe.com> <4ea1de9c.67b4ec0a.553d.122a@mx.google.com> <87aa8t10np.fsf@gmail.com> <4ea5a95b.059dec0a.606e.0c92@mx.google.com> <874nypkn6y.fsf@gmail.com> <87obwwkia5.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55228) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RL39r-0005re-Tb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:28:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RL39q-0001dx-No for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:28:55 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f47.google.com ([209.85.210.47]:34196) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RL39q-0001dk-JD for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:28:54 -0400 Received: by pzd13 with SMTP id 13so19628173pzd.6 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 18:28:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Samuel Wales's message of "Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:22:30 -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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Samuel Wales Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org My concerns with respect to a property drawer solution are two fold. 1) In the same way that #+PROPERTY: assumes its value will live on a single line, property drawers assume that their values will live on a single line. I don't see how it will be easier to fold multi-line properties into drawers than outside of drawers. 2) It is not possible to specify file-wide properties with drawers, unlike with property lines. Thanks -- Eric Samuel Wales writes: > Hi Eric, > > Properties can be specified in the properties drawer. But > multiple-line ones cannot at present (at least not without serializing the way > multiple-line macros are serialized). > > Therefore you propose new syntax for multiple-line properties. > > I propose that allowing the properties drawer to handle multiple-line > properties might have 3 advantages over adding block syntax. > > 1: If you want a single-line property, you have a choice. If you want > a multiple-line > property, you have to use a block. That seems inconsistent. > > 2: Some people would probably have use for multiple-line properties, such > as in org-contacts. Doesn't have to be Babel. People are used to the > properties drawer. Also, external parsers are. > > 3: Nic objects to blocks without discussing them first. > > Perhaps upgrading properties drawer will satisfy that objection /and/ be > consistent /and/ allow further uses in Org. > > This all presumes we're sticking with properties for Babel. > > Samuel > > -- > The Kafka Pandemic: http://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com > === > Bigotry against people with serious diseases is still bigotry. -- Eric Schulte http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/