From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Wales Subject: Re: Some projects Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 13:24:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87wpub9jts.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35436) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZqRq1-0002jy-LN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 16:24:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZqRq0-0003iv-R4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 16:24:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]:36107) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZqRq0-0003ip-LO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 16:24:20 -0400 Received: by wicfx6 with SMTP id fx6so89037677wic.1 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2015 13:24:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87wpub9jts.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> 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 i like some of these ideas, particularly lexical. org already has a lot of syntax. i am leery of introducing yet more heterogenous syntax to org. key word heterogenous. i don't mind more features if it is always using the same syntax framework and thus can take advantage of everything else that uses it. key word framework. thus, i'd propose a single syntax framework that takes care of future syntax. a syntax framework like $[annotation ...] where ... is specifiable as a lisp lambda list or similar could also be used for other features, including long-form emphasis. i don't think long-form emphasis is a bad idea at all. it allows export back end independence. i only think it is bad if it means introducing heterogenous, non-framework syntax. a single framework takes care of future features too. and as a bonus it allows future subfeatures. for example, there is no need to implement authorship in annotations until we decide we want them later. when we do, just add a keyword option: $[annotation :author "joe"]. and yet another bonus is that it could be used for user-defined features. all without adding heterogenous non-framework syntax. === i would need fontification to be able to fontify inline footnotes that have more than one paragraph [i.e. have blank lines in them, which is currently not allowed in 8.x org export. fontification currently and always has fontified them correctly from my perspective i.e. by allowing multiple paragraphs].