From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: About commit named "Allow multi-line properties to be specified in property blocks" Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:06:17 +0100 Message-ID: <87vcr5c76e.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:39998) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKxCy-0007uH-PU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:07:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKxCx-0001c0-9h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:07:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ww0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:59778) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RKxCw-0001bl-UM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:07:43 -0400 Received: by wwe3 with SMTP id 3so1872585wwe.30 for ; Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:07:41 -0700 (PDT) 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: Org Mode List Hello, I just noticed that commit (8354fd9e0f5fff04665b2272fff6376b15ec0225). Could we talk about it before pushing it, a few days before the release? I am a bit worried about the new block types being introduced recently. Some may be justified, I don't know yet, but "#+begin_property" definitely isn't. By looking at the Org syntax. what appears clearly is that Org blocks are used for contents formatting. Center blocks, quote blocks, verse blocks, special blocks, example blocks, export blocks, even src blocks (even though these blocks may be used for very different things, they exist primarily to display source code)... there's no exception. On the other hand, Org internals are controlled through keywords, property drawers, and options on blocks. As "#+begin_property" block isn't about contents. I can't see any reason for it to exist under this shape. So, again, can we discuss about another approach that would not break the logic behind Org's syntax? I don't fully grasp the problem it tries to solve, but what's wrong with, for example, "#+property: var multiple couples"? What's wrong with :var_list: x=1,y=3,z=4 in a property drawer? What's wrong with #+header: :var x=1, y=2, z=3 just above the source block? As your already know, #+header can span already on multiple lines. Hoping we can find a more elegant solution, Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou