From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "William Henney" Subject: Re: an annoying indentation Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:44:34 -0500 Message-ID: <41c818190706150644y5c0c909dy52cacbf022871b1c@mail.gmail.com> References: <466ED55E.1070804@calicojack.co.uk> <3a39e8471057cbbd01a7dca42cdc3d39@science.uva.nl> <20070614105700.46b2b82d@CNDLS-3T02621> <28563.1181833352@lap1.smtl.co.uk> <982c465a6635a5e96e2ab7684fcff518@science.uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HzC6P-0001dc-Tk for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:44:37 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HzC6N-0001dO-W2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:44:37 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HzC6N-0001dL-S1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:44:35 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.249]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HzC6N-0000DF-HF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:44:35 -0400 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c25so178454ana for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 06:44:35 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <982c465a6635a5e96e2ab7684fcff518@science.uva.nl> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 6/15/07, Carsten Dominik wrote: > > On Jun 14, 2007, at 17:02, pete phillips wrote: > > >>>>>> "John" =3D=3D John Rakestraw writes: > > John> In response to which, Leo wrote: > > > >>> I think '- item 3' still should be aligned to '- item 2'. If user > >>> want to move the item deeper, 'M-right' can be used. > >>> > > > > John> I agree with Leo -- or, rather, his proposal matches more > > nicely the > > John> way I work. I often have lists with some items annotated and > > John> others not annotated -- > > > > I agree with John and Leo. > > Wow, what a turnout, and unanimous too. > > Note that this will also imply that a list like > > - item 1 > - item 2 > - item 2a > - item 2b > - item 3 > > would be flattened by TAB presses going from top to bottom. > Not according to my understanding, since items 2a and 2b would fall under the "unless it already has a deeper indentation than that" clause, so TAB wouldn't touch them. I'm not sure that this is what everyone else is agreeing to though... Cheers Will --=20 Dr William Henney, Centro de Radioastronom=EDa y Astrof=EDsica, Universidad Nacional Aut=F3noma de M=E9xico, Campus Morelia