From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Limitations on using Org mode in buffers mixing Org markup with non-Org markup (was: Convert README.org to plain text README while installing package) Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2022 12:40:10 +0800 Message-ID: <87k09ewpn9.fsf@localhost> References: <87leuca7v7.fsf@disroot.org> <87bkv527p5.fsf@gmail.com> <835yld93w7.fsf@gnu.org> <877d5t0yrn.fsf@gmail.com> <83o7z47m7y.fsf@gnu.org> <8735gfs3is.fsf@localhost> <838rq75jhg.fsf@gnu.org> <87fskfqj97.fsf@localhost> <83zgin3zcm.fsf@gnu.org> <87fskei4fa.fsf@localhost> <831qvy41oj.fsf@gnu.org> <87tu8rq2l6.fsf@localhost> <83czffzo73.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6aiqnpc.fsf@localhost> <831qvuw98i.fsf@gnu.org> <87wndmp63n.fsf@localhost> <83sfoaurqk.fsf@gnu.org> <87tu8mv79u.fsf@localhost> <83czfart19.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8szrfz6.fsf@localhost> <83ilozpzce.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16075"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: theophilusx@gmail.com, acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 18 06:40:38 2022 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 1o2QGD-000408-Rv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 06:40:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42098 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2QGC-0006xZ-8A for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 00:40:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38628) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2QEk-000686-AI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 00:39:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pf1-x436.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::436]:39727) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o2QEi-0003r7-GY; Sat, 18 Jun 2022 00:39:06 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pf1-x436.google.com with SMTP id p14so68393pfh.6; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 21:39:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=1D5rznu85YQr9F+SbY1T/ePm6nwUy2dkQgcTxmQYCrc=; b=ggxKvnwG42VQSSbwHK3fd5Au9COUDBFBrG369z/QlvyzKxdxDqmQcB0Vxqh5j96JN/ QD1rzCJAwjp56L0dgreyLuuh+KZ6LZfVCPL6F4tZtZ8Rd4JXVjdDTSp9eHa0/9GoYrUS NEsWtcVrYeE37XquycMwWtpiFOS4Zv80tNDxSjo4OXf5LVY1mUyhwuq1rk5NOixlajw6 OXe3O32jqExniG2xi1leW0XWzSdCn1fXaBsUCXDSTb1YP+mc4hj04DIpb4SujCzNSFHj GrfGr0CXjPkctgvqYwNLxVxzAxxfI43MNpVjv9Kgl1MtrpUlyXYQLENWU6xTWxjfySrp NVGg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=1D5rznu85YQr9F+SbY1T/ePm6nwUy2dkQgcTxmQYCrc=; b=tWv2Oj+ODJ30FXWBLrwZpupJ4I0uTFTBRTxv1qcRQCiRJQnZlbpiKr4cqDe1JH2oy2 eIUS49+NgMc385ivKohFGZso7h254+ozJvHZP5evOfNuIjOZT1IMFleGRlSh/qJpnYoC KOElfUK3ASVQVNhB8jDSDFfr2OWb7GKccJEP9Za/PBlJETvw34Am4HEJYKqsYHP2FvJH der6m+ytMM+JgQviD7x2jDvPsCkw6f+0RckGg8RVBTbOYbVVcYV0gH8a03uC00TOmnIq j6pn/B2Aktf7We5DfLLwkL5ywXR0NoN4REk8dP3P3wYEEQoNsRlKrz0UUjoD0z5YiglU /ngA== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8GjstmbHyg9dBdCKxhpCTgBaFEUqgJrn8XqbxAjocf5e/14bTc AJ6Kkr6cvlWkK1wEXSj+A7jUbGOkYEZHF+59 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vn7b9WBeyBWcE7/QbnLR0KpPrnKeMed5xcb7ZgZesWRjkpBRfFHc1T7+NTTHNMLc7OGY8clA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:d314:0:b0:3fc:7054:bf54 with SMTP id b20-20020a63d314000000b003fc7054bf54mr11755102pgg.615.1655527142347; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 21:39:02 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost ([204.44.110.111]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q3-20020a170902f78300b0016788487357sm4356200pln.132.2022.06.17.21.39.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 17 Jun 2022 21:39:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83ilozpzce.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::436; envelope-from=yantar92@gmail.com; helo=mail-pf1-x436.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:291327 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> I do not think that Org will support major user changes in Org syntax >> any time soon or in future. At least, there is no intention to guarantee >> such support. > > Neither of the other markup modes is being proposed for viewing and > editing documents that were not originally edited under those modes. > By contrast, there's a fraction of Emacs contributors and developers > who repeatedly suggest to use Org for documents that were not > originally written in Org. A notable example (not the only one) is > recent discussions of turning on Org when visiting NEWS files. Do I understand correctly that users would like to have some Org features (like fontification) in text that partially follows Org markup, but not fully? If so, Org mode cannot be used there as a major mode. non-Org parts of syntax will cause undefined behavior. Which is to be expected as major mode (every major mode) uses certain assumptions about the text in buffer. Even text-mode will behave weirdly if binary data is mixed with plain text. Org major mode expects text in buffers to be using Org markup. On the other hand, some parts of Org functionality are available in a form of minor modes or individual commands. As usual, minor modes are less demanding on the text in buffer. AFAIK, we have the following functionality exposed to non-Org buffers: - org-open-at-point-global/org-insert-link-global commands - orgtbl-mode to edit tables, which use Org table syntax outside Org mode - (ELPA) orgalist mode to edit lists written using Org list syntax outside Org mode - (MELPA) org-msg mode to edit and send messages using Org markup (it exports to html mime parts) - outline minor mode share a lot of functionality with Org without relying on Org markup. AFAIK, some Org features have been ported back to outline mode as well. This dedicated functionality is designed to be used outside Org markup buffers. People who request Org mode to be used in non-Org buffers probably have a specific subset of useful Org features in mind. I'd ask them which features they want to and then consider exposing them out from Org mode into minor mode (if not yet covered by the above). > If you think these ideas are problematic from the POV of Org > developers, please voice this opinion whenever such proposals are > brought up. Those proposals, and in general the proposals to use Org > widely in unrelated contexts, is what I had in mind all the time in > this discussion. Perhaps now you can better understand some of my > comments and responses. I do understand you comments now. However, I do not follow emacs-devel closely. So, it would be more efficient to CC Org ML in such discussions. > For example, what is your opinion of using Org markup in email > messages? There are a lot of examples of that, both here and on the > bug tracker. People use Org markup and Org-style code blocks quite a > lot, and reading that is always jarring to me. For some reason, > people assume that I read my email in Org mode or some derivative of > Org. I also noticed that. AFAIU it is sometimes the text part sent by org-msg and sometimes people just using Org syntax, because why not. I personally do not see a problem with using Org markup to indicate code blocks. At least, it is not much different from markdown some other people are using in emails. Even without Org mode, such markup is perfectly readable. AFAIK, there is no convention on indicating "special" parts of plain text email (e.g. code snippets) in mailing lists. The convention for indicating "markup" in emails is associating the correct mime-type to the message part. If it is html, the mail agent should render html. If it is Org, Org can be rendered. If it is plain text, the behavior is undefined in principle - people sending plain text should make the text readable as plain text in text-mode (Org can be made readable usually, but same can be said for e.g. Markdown). Best, Ihor