From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "William Henney" Subject: Re: Re: list indentation Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2008 19:28:54 -0600 Message-ID: <41c818190802091728s2bbe4389of5d04abc9532c32a@mail.gmail.com> References: <62CB93EA-C3B9-4AA7-A8AB-FD8F52A88F81@science.uva.nl> <41c818190802091345n5a49e5f2p23f50186144c33f3@mail.gmail.com> <41c818190802091450g6226c7abp86ad56eb09e8f2b1@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JO106-0000Kn-UA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:28:59 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JO105-0000K0-Ee for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:28:58 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JO105-0000Jw-4y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:28:57 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JO104-0002QQ-UO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:28:57 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so110784ugf.48 for ; Sat, 09 Feb 2008 17:28:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: 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: cezar Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Cezar On Feb 9, 2008 5:41 PM, cezar wrote: > How common is a blank line in a list item ? > I'd say it's more common for a blank line to end a list item. I agree that multi-paragraph list items are not that common. A quick random sampling of my own org files indicates about 3 instances per 1000 lines (so about 70 in total - wow, I have over 23,000 lines of org files!). However, the point is that they do exist and up to now have been (at least implicitly) encouraged. I think that, all else being equal, it is best to maintain backwards compatibility. On the other hand, if the majority decision were to outlaw multi-paragraph list items, then I wouldn't be unduly upset. A list item that complicated should probably have been a separate subheading anyway. Cheers Will --=20 Dr William Henney, Centro de Radioastronom=EDa y Astrof=EDsica, Universidad Nacional Aut=F3noma de M=E9xico, Campus Morelia