From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: [bug, org] footnote-action broken with narrowed buffer
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:57:06 +0200
Message-ID: <87oambrz4d.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <87lhhhzdf5.fsf@gmx.us> <87bnidcnfq.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<87h9s5z2kx.fsf@gmx.us> <87fv7obnyb.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<87tww4xz4i.fsf@gmx.us> <877ft0bdw0.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<87bnicxeax.fsf@gmx.us>
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]:49200)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YmJHu-0001YK-6r
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 05:55:47 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YmJHt-0005U4-8m
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 05:55:46 -0400
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::196]:41504)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YmJHt-0005Ti-33
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 26 Apr 2015 05:55:45 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87bnicxeax.fsf@gmx.us> (rasmus@gmx.us's message of "Sat, 25 Apr
	2015 20:17:58 +0200")
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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:

> The problem is that narrow can be time-consuming to recreate.

This is why we shouldn't mess with it in the first place.

> Wouldn't it only find definition in the same file?  If you use a popup
> indirect buffer narrowed to the footnote-definition in question I don't
> think these problems can exist. In any case, this would seem similar to
> the way ob handles code blocks.

Good idea. I didn't thought about using "org-src.el", but, albeit not
perfect, it goes a long way towards avoiding these problems.

I toyed a bit with that. Now C-' on a (non inline) footnote reference
should edit it in a dedicated buffer.

Feedback welcome.


Regards,