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.orgmode,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Org syntax compatibility with texinfo syntax (was: Org mode and Emacs (was: Convert README.org to plain text README while installing package)) Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 14:42:40 +0800 Message-ID: <87k09frdsv.fsf@localhost> References: <87ee038ipt.fsf@gmx.de> <87o7z61v59.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkv527p5.fsf@gmail.com> <835yld93w7.fsf@gnu.org> <877d5t0yrn.fsf@gmail.com> <87r140yuof.fsf@gmail.com> <875yl9e7zm.fsf@gmail.com> <83czfh12kp.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmjhghu2.fsf@localhost> <835yl910gp.fsf@gnu.org> <87wndndbhq.fsf@gmail.com> <83bkuzznws.fsf@gnu.org> <877d5mqmkh.fsf@localhost> <87czfcm5w9.fsf@localhost> <87h74mv56b.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9612"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: eliz@gnu.org, theophilusx@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, acm@muc.de, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 17 08:44:28 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geo-emacs-orgmode@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 1o25iV-0002Ck-Fq for geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 08:44:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47436 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o25iT-0008Jv-VJ for geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:44:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54636) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o25fr-0008I4-QD; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:41:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]:36385) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o25fl-0000D5-SM; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 02:41:42 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id u18so3122400plb.3; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:41:36 -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=NxDlh1MwBk9Nt9mOx0J2LEsBbHcp3LEGCNkL9slOlP4=; b=gZLJ+aMsrBHxmllfZCltZgvXqAq/6uogk8wrXRCcveEoBP3VqCqNIRW2BfUhDUfnMf r/PHmxjcWtoxcBU7CBdum6o7WbbDrsE8XWhrriLhjeaUc6+WRXAR4lr56ovClwxPGnF6 nL6EuG6JeXcuK+FgapYMFrhnNQf34gWSu9ZmllkSlzqVEKXavPdbh26OL2BB221n0/HC 21SHJ3pMQhRaqy31upcAnYS3TKFEEOc/qtFZ5RTgOc+apoHXr3fiILpYWJHzOH4LIikf 8i527jARF9Mq4YMXIWi1buDVOUZZRuji4HsVdNpOOsUcjCP362qLHMdFvYzUE3/3fZ2d TWJg== 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=NxDlh1MwBk9Nt9mOx0J2LEsBbHcp3LEGCNkL9slOlP4=; b=2neanDbGfD3C9WuKpOvxSm3RdFpcQdPlqNPXh988XhZAPkOyF6d0tH/e+8+Of6DViA GSTrbEs7ZnuctbMZCsHuMoDKNU00cDXpMYjfw+EMJlV/GVFNVIlNSCsBRiMpgQa8cvWj bLIo7M4nN3TNjjRBhYY3J8B/drCtDzX632Tb05oB0Mz/su72jpEdVAxrTpbGjvqLMt7f k/UpkQPbTIoPbJpUUN7HLE2MzbwZ+Xy3ELjcEx8FToL7L9sYfxQGbKT4SVY44g4hBtdP XCScnTsPdhusHNFkzvmwYZWPEkxILvou6i4KMFzi6hDOO3RJLSbgB2JrjYrKjxTpDWjw mdpQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+qJ/Rhy7lXNxnSSjv6gGV2Rame96Ko2A9ho/oXflDio2lbsYkf ciZVwFDsVrtS/7Fk0h423D3uhzY4eOWsHPiZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1sTAKR2lswTDGLpsDOa8iK0aOWhqMZ+TcW99L2J6sv6oBrgpwE+vIf1oe1G3RabSmsJof/1aQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:350f:b0:1e6:94e1:bd17 with SMTP id ls15-20020a17090b350f00b001e694e1bd17mr20155220pjb.162.1655448094951; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:41:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost ([66.154.105.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x5-20020a170902a38500b00168d9630b49sm2690911pla.307.2022.06.16.23.41.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:41:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87h74mv56b.fsf@localhost> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::630; envelope-from=yantar92@gmail.com; helo=mail-pl1-x630.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-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.orgmode:146113 gmane.emacs.devel:291274 Archived-At: I am forwarding yet another email from the emacs-devel thread to here. This thread includes both emacs-devel and Org ML. I will still keep emacs-devel in the loop because people from there can provide a useful insight about texinfo capabilities. Richard Stallman wrote: > I don't know for certain that every possible nesting "does the right > thing". I do know that @var{} is used inside many other constructs. > By contrast, @dfn{} would not be nested inside or around other > contructs very much. @key can be nested inside @kbd, and it behaves > a little differently when nested. signifying (in addition to previous message), that 1. Texinfo has some software documentation-specific markup elements 2. Those elements can be nested in non-trivial ways, similar to Org's org-element-object-restrictions, the that nesting can affect formatted export (again, similar to Org). With regards to Org syntax, I do not think that we must include all the possible texinfo elements into Org standard. @dfn, @key, and @var constructs are extremely specific to software documentation and have no sense to maintain as a part of general-purpose markup syntax. However, what we can do is to allow extending Org syntax to support such elements. We do support custom syntax elements already (or are discussing such support): We have the following, potentially customizeable syntax elements: - Org links (extensible via org-link-set-parameters) - Special blocks (de-facto extensible in export backends; also, https://github.com/alhassy/org-special-block-extras/); https://list.orgmode.org/87edzqv4ha.fsf@localhost/T/#m6b95119faa65645fd1c32b0e17b6440f73ecd3af - [FR] Inline special blocks idea being discussed in https://orgmode.org/list/87a6b8pbhg.fsf@posteo.net The links are somewhat limited wrt nesting: links cannot be nested inside links thus limiting their usefulness as custom markup. Hence, we may need to look more closely into the idea of inline special blocks (discuss it in https://orgmode.org/list/87a6b8pbhg.fsf@posteo.net). Special blocks already support custom :type, but lack convenient Elisp interface like org-link-set-parameters. (let's keep this part in https://list.orgmode.org/87edzqv4ha.fsf@localhost/T/#m6b95119faa65645fd1c32b0e17b6440f73ecd3af) I'd like to keep discussion on the specifics of customizeable Org syntax in the relevant threads. In here, I'd like to hear feedback on possible additional incompatibilities between texinfo and Org. Is there anything (not covered by the above list) that is present in texinfo, but impossible in Org? For starters, Org does not have a full support for generating index (apart from ox-texinfo and ox-publish). Though see https://github.com/tecosaur/org-glossary Best, Ihor