Re: are super-hidden technical blocks required?

[Torsten Wagner <torsten.wagner@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1670 bytes --]

Hey Bastien,

On 7 August 2012 19:23, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:
> that a drawer doesn't make an
> entry non-empty while cycling,

ohhh you challenge us... "does not ... non-empty".... is in fact the
same like "if there is only a drawer, the entry is still empty"....
right ?!

Yes, I agree that should be separated.

Maybe an idea would be a rule like....
if all properties in a drawer are marked as hidden and there is
nothing else for the particular entry (no body), do not open the entry
for the next cycling rounds.
I just tested a bit and org-mode is clever enough already to avoid any
text-insertion before the property drawer if text get added to a
collapsed entry.
Thus, this rule just might work and hide "technical" properties
completely during cycling.
Combined with a #+HIDDEN_PROP: line each and everyone can adjust
individually how much and what he likes to hide.

#+HIDDEN_PROP: * <----- all properties are hidden
would be the extreme and all property drawers will be hidden in case
they are the only element of a entry. In case other elements are
included, they collapsed drawer line will be dimmed by a different
face to indicate that only "hidden" properties are included

#+HIDDEN_PROP:    <---- this means no properties are hidden
would be the other extreme and nothing would be hidden (that
essentially would represent the present state).

I created two mock-ups. One shows the present solution and the other
shows how certain properties can be marked "hidden" and which effect
does this have on different level and combinations. Hope that helps
within this discussion. I choose a arbitrary colour scheme to make it
rather good visible.

Torsten

[-- Attachment #2: org_hidden_drawer_mockup_proposed_method.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 11419 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: org_hidden_drawer_mockup_orignal.png --]
[-- Type: image/png, Size: 9231 bytes --]