From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Guerry Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Org mode and Emacs Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 11:04:33 +0200 Message-ID: <87il93xzku.fsf@bzg.fr> References: <87y1u8b1gj.fsf@gmail.com> <8735cgot9x.fsf@gnu.org> <83leq7naql.fsf@gnu.org> <86o7v3ryan.fsf@gmail.com> <87wn9qfyv6.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0zy63u3.fsf@localhost> <87h70ufwr1.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7j48eg9.fsf@localhost> <83ttsw2oeb.fsf@gnu.org> <87lee889ta.fsf@localhost> <87cyzcwtbc.fsf@bzg.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="11197"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 25 11:05:14 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qZSkk-0002dV-2Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 11:05:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZSkF-0004AA-39; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:04:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZSkD-00049V-D5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:04:41 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZSkB-00061V-TU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:04:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=Be7olQ5imDrsjbLicEHBQFhjcsK3kicQQCbRGujRtu4=; b=AVt3cL/Y7qKInRFgP2rl k4P94POljcTS9BG7Udjpelilve6mnWk8IcjoISnzpWaufbIc+LQt+nDFeHlD1x2s9qcE6A0qlospL etiYuwxrCAkjaMnPU3Plk5zEQ3zE47Rff1z4v+kW8b8tkKWNAfMUowcKA2xZ6xERA9NBq0bsxOSOv 1S0MNmi7BDrfRxoogAsu0nUUKBfMkHmnlo+ls+XgKv+6R+VpHvIA7LDFdHbomxDNtsix5RsRFcbtR dHfuR3a0pH90LCWIXqUXgwWW751pwlHNyDp7203FZbSjh5dCaZtymES2w21T/OlfG4gfkKmiRU4Ll vESQiJJAqs8mXw==; In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Thu, 24 Aug 2023 21:14:21 -0400") X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309205 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > The term "as good as" may suggest, incorrectly, that this is a matter > of comparing the two formats over some sense of _quality_. But that's > not what this is about. The improvements I've proposed for Org format > are a matter of _supporting the range of necessary constructs_. I'm confident we can support the necessary constructs in Org. > > Let's simply try to improve Org in general, and see if more GNU > > maintainers want to use it as their native documentat format (the > > example of Org's documentation shows it's already possible.) > > We need to be careful here. What does the existence of Org mode > documentation written in Org format actually show -- given that the > format doesn't support all the constructs that are needed in general? > > It might show that the Org mode documentation doesn't make all the > textual distinctions properly -- that it fails to follow our style > guide. If so, then it is "possible" but only with flawed output. If a .texi expert can report such flaws in the Org manual, we can then fix them and, if needed, implement the necessary constructs. > But not necesarily. Perhaps it shows that the Org mode documentation > needs only a limited subset of those constructs, and those are all > implemened in Ogr format. If so, that could mean that Org format is > fine for the Org mode manual in prticular, but is not adequate for the > whole range of our documentation. I believe this is more plausible. > Either way, to make Org format adequate for that whole range of > constructs, in all the output formats, will require working > specifically towards that goal. Agreed, and this is what Org maintainers are working on. -- Bastien Guerry