From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Moving "manual.org" into core
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 18:20:22 +0100
Message-ID: <87d1216ca1.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <87bmhooaj9.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87tvveqi7u.fsf@bzg.fr>
	<87wp0a57i5.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<CAFyQvY0x+uOePLL+geLTpWWKD8XksOUxC=FV4sutQu3NAtaRfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<87lggp6fvh.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<CAFyQvY2NBtFFtKBBTJptPAeM_HhMGqGoYAGraL0mc4D2qJuzmA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43224)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1edflm-0004Il-Jo
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:20:31 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1edfll-0000IC-9b
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:20:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAFyQvY2NBtFFtKBBTJptPAeM_HhMGqGoYAGraL0mc4D2qJuzmA@mail.gmail.com>
	(Kaushal Modi's message of "Mon, 22 Jan 2018 17:00:45 +0000")
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: <http://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+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Kaushal Modi <kaushal.modi@gmail.com>
Cc: Bastien Guerry <bzg@gnu.org>, Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>, Org Mode List <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Kaushal Modi <kaushal.modi@gmail.com> writes:

> I am hoping that using "begin_src org" preserves the meta data that a code
> block is an Org snippet when the Org manual HTML pages are published on
> orgmode.org.

Again, Org manual, as published in "orgmode.org", is generated through
Texinfo, which treats "begin_src org" exactly as "begin_example". So,
switching to "begin_src org" will not give us Org fontification in HTML
output.

> Moreover, the advantage of using "begin_example" instead is:
>> 1. we can use fixed-width for one-liners,
>>
>
> I personally don't see that as a big advantage. Whether the snippet is a
> single line or more, one can just select those and use the Org structural
> template insertion to wrap that with "#+begin_src org" .. "#+end_src".

This is not about typing. When the markup is more visible than the
contents, it is visual clutter.

>> 2. Org fontification for source blocks can be sometimes misleading,
>>    as you sometimes cannot what is an example and what is not.

> I didn't understand that limitation. I use Org src blocks quite liberally
> in this Org document[1], some even with nested non-Org src blocks.
>
> #+BEGIN_SRC org :noweb-ref src-block-n-default-continue
> ,#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp +n
> ;; This will be listed as line 22
> (message "This is line 23")
> ,#+END_SRC
> #+END_SRC
>
> I haven't found any issue.

It is a matter of taste. I tested both when updating the manual, and
eventually settled for example blocks.

In any case, I have no strong opinion about it. I just lean towards
simplicity.

> While pasting that example, I realized, that you don't even need to
> specially made an Org snippet an src block just because you want to use it
> as a noweb ref in the manual. Making Org snippets, src blocks, always, just
> feels like the right thing.

I didn't understand this part.