Re: Marking/highlighting text temporarily

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
>
>> Just to be clear, you think it fits into the category of
>> incubation-prior-to-core?
>
> I think inlinetasks/comments that are actually *inline* would be nice!
>
>> If anyone thinks that this mechanism warrants actual new Org syntax, I'd
>> be happy to work on implementing that. But to be honest, I think it sits
>> pretty comfortably on top of what's already available. The only slight
>> awkwardness comes when you'd like a different face for the annotation
>> links (currently solved with John Kitchin's hi-lock trick), and the fact
>> that the link export routines don't have access to the exportation
>> info/plist channels (ie, when exporting an annotation link to ODT, I'd
>> like to be able to give the annotation an "author" element, but as far
>> as I know I can't get access to that). These aren't major flaws.
>
> See my other post.  In addition you'd need to be able to turn them off via
>
>     #+OPTIONS: annotations:nil
>     
>
>> I'll admit I have dreamed of a syntax that looks like: [[body text to
>> annotate][TODO:Look this up on the internet:@work]].
>
> I don't like the example.  The ordering is weird.  Do the first and the
> second bracket need to be tied together?  Or would something like this
> work:
>
>       body text to annotate [todo@work: Look this up on the internet]
>
> Or 
>
>     [todo@work: Look this up on the internet]{body text to annotate}
>     [todo@work look this up on the internet: body text to annotate]

Okay, so you're basically proposing taking this to a much higher level.
I'm totally in favor, in principle, and don't actually care too much
what the actual syntax looks like. I do think it would be important to
specify the text being annotated, so your first example above wouldn't
be too ideal. The others I'd be happy with.

As the veteran of several small projects that have died of mission
creep, I still wouldn't mind keeping org-comments (I do think it should
be renamed org-annotate) as-is, and letting the "real" inline todo
project progress separately.

Eric