From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id sBx6Hc3mp2H56QAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 22:19:09 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id aCY/Gc3mp2HVHQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 21:19:09 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C56513181C for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 22:19:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:51872 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1msX0N-0005GM-27 for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 16:19:07 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38268) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1msWyv-0005FF-K8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 16:17:42 -0500 Received: from mout-p-101.mailbox.org ([80.241.56.151]:40360) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1msWyr-0001WM-0Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Dec 2021 16:17:35 -0500 Received: from smtp1.mailbox.org (smtp1.mailbox.org [80.241.60.240]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-384) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-101.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4J4BkG6FZXzQkJ9 for ; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 22:17:26 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at heinlein-support.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=guelker.eu; s=MBO0001; t=1638393444; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gbCCO7umrY8KmLcnpKOY6SyJb+IM3O9wZgsS70lxOIc=; b=xEpjOQhAgV8lfLvQKfcdDdoNOeN9akCRBzqj1ZK86D4SAtQuRzXEWQp38gcSn/V4rznlDy Dd9007JWwEL8hVCttrJDGSsBI5c3cHER1UuRKT365qIARku2U3VxYSsqbue6Y1GVRWt06E PVN1TxAzuvYIBGBu8N2UwwEE+bYgyvBZaOTCsr+aJVkWyGUMycZzKUfbaDIiMPYPGs1Js9 5Bg0ONHD5KofTYiaHk94SbLmG3yG42se66qw2Z2Q1w9hbvEPYWUAUJtyv8CSgFCywtn5YW Gq6v3igUoSTTy6vMPfQIJiIoyQIMD0fh+U9Rb1oxdXinz+1I7HrZ18NduOUnow== References: <2021-11-28T20-44-37@devnull.Karl-Voit.at> <875ysb7v1r.fsf@gmail.com> <2021-11-29T14-12-55@devnull.Karl-Voit.at> <87tufuu8ah.fsf@atlantis> <2021-11-30T21-02-53@devnull.Karl-Voit.at> From: M. =?utf-8?B?4oCYcXVpbnR1c+KAmSBHw7xsa2Vy?= To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: Orgdown: negative feedback & attempt of a root-cause analysis (was: "Orgdown", the new name for the syntax of Org-mode) Message-ID: <877dcokdn9.fsf@atlantis> In-reply-to: <2021-11-30T21-02-53@devnull.Karl-Voit.at> Mail-Followup-To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 22:17:11 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.241.56.151; envelope-from=post+orgmodeml@guelker.eu; helo=mout-p-101.mailbox.org X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 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+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1638393549; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=gbCCO7umrY8KmLcnpKOY6SyJb+IM3O9wZgsS70lxOIc=; b=u+bAsHrViG/VAAMSDU52+5fzy/eTTVQlT1YphKFQQizyC9AuhYOckWvKgN6z0TsfAn0M84 W985H2RNB7tD2AsooPWEW/i8nSUmYYaRKx7etFoSRYqHHW59rOEHgK+iix6qkIG61RyTOk luxmCwIo3oL+aZ2ZdwpqF5Bmqfv1MYAnbIgqZGhAbQ2MgNxi0kV/PSBAqXJGDyURmMJhEB 8Pmv/In52g0aF3ei8rjfqyw0VstCDYxWE4VtFia6IUFU16Jaj771+m+8Jjwap1d7g1qYNO XjthVz29Ha30EBEk2XVV/nrS+X5sTEMXi+kUbR/UYgEccHK/FYp4N+/2GSYgDg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1638393549; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=emjZ2IshcVlr4d80B+OXb0yrZC1w05dDRy8s6H1127NwQBgE+iepQ44lzq3kTVvfspxlU/ TvWqKq8JxVQgbeP2Ty16NufLpzvVPyIQVTzpMQWqMc6CCj+SxnNtm74nzlAnaa77Dll4rr YJMX+i3C5DFx+1EXDx6P1fwBjAZzEpTiBFmBqrm0QK4QKokxMGr1kqT/Pc4PSBjdrUEeP3 eDRQsz3Rji+Irrq2DYm462xysBDefU9MekjvOzd4rgCOnZX8c0IfBXZIu+M/2vL7AUxKhx MAqQ/tlcaN7w0Z9psTlYYCyPZBppvx9HDgx9gARyBuGSVZlTPGiV7qd9v1d9Qw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=guelker.eu header.s=MBO0001 header.b=xEpjOQhA; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.99 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=guelker.eu header.s=MBO0001 header.b=xEpjOQhA; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: C56513181C X-Spam-Score: -3.99 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: nUUCkw/wTaeg Am Dienstag, dem 30. November 2021 schrieb Karl Voit: > One of the next things I do have on my list is to try out crdt as > I've learned at EmacsConf21 that it is mature enough to be used in > practice.=20 > > If that holds true, we can start dreaming of having a Etherpad-like > session from our GNU/Emacs while peers are connected to the same > session via some web-based tool/service. I never heard of crdt, but distributed editing sounds useful. There is Git, of course, but unless you are a programmer, using Git is pretty much arcane. I was not yet successful to explain Git to MS Word users, who are actually happy with the change tracking tooling Word has built in. Though that might be more of a topic for the emacs-humanities mailing list rather than this list. > The dominant feedback of > https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/r4cq3o/orgdown_the_new_name_for_t= he_syntax_of_orgmode/ > was negative comments on the name and nothing else. Even here, > although due to a much more civilized style, the name choice was the > dominant topic and not the idea. I have to take this as a strong > signal here and I'm very close in giving up on Orgdown as a project. The civility of this list is one of the reasons why I like to read it. I find it incredible how people behave on these so-called social media. That alone indicates that something is wrong with them. You should not give up on the project. As I have learned from reading this thread, there appear to be people who already work on formalising org=E2=80=99s grammar. You ought to talk to them and see if it is possible = to unite efforts. Tom Gillespie in a message further down this thread has mentioned that formalising org is a huge effort. I agree with that, but your novel concept of =E2=80=9Ccompatibility levels=E2=80=9D is something I= could see as an intermediate step. It could help to accelerate the formalising efforts and non-Emacs tools could start targetting them quickly. But I might be wrong on seeing this as an advantage; I have never written formal specifications. It is certainly your success to have generated this discussion thread; I was not aware of any similar formalisation efforts. I hope that if nothing else, it contributes to this efforts. > People do not seem to realize what it took to get there - which is > partly understandingly because I had to learn by doing what it takes > to get the idea into a coherent and consistent form. I do not think anybody wanted to feel you bad. Most are trying to provide constructive criticism to you in order to improve your suggestions. There are very few people who are fundamentally opposed to your effort, because they firmly believe there can be no org outside of Emacs. My suggestion is to ignore them and continue on your path, because your idea has no impact on them and they can by definition not help you to improve it. Naming is one of the hard things in Computer Science. Just leave the naming issue aside and work with the people here to formalise the compatibility levels. > Bastien told me that he would be interested to see hard numbers on > my assumption that Org-mode syntax is easier to learn and type in > comparison to other LWM. And he is right: some research work in > order to get numbers would be awesome to shed some light on the > forest of assumptions. Maybe somebody in a position to realize such > a case study gets motivated now? ;-) Entirely subjectively, typing: #+begin_src python #+end_src manually without help of the editor feels more difficult than typing: ~~~~ python ~~~~ Any non-Emacs org(down) editor should ensure to ease typing that. For the purposes of refining your proposal conducting the =E2=80=9Ccase stu= dy=E2=80=9D simply by inquiry on this mailing list might suffice. Many people around here know Markdown and I guess there is no value in applying rigorous scientific standards here. > Does "assuming too much on other people's world because on my own > small world" have a scientific name? I might be in danger of having > this disease? *g* I have fallen to this earlier. My computer is full of things to solve problems many people simply do not even have. I need citation software that interacts with my Biblatex files, for instance. Since my e.g. my work collegues do not even use Biblatex, they do not have such a need. Typing citations out by hand is rather popular in my area; if it is not done manually, people appear to use Citavi. I certainly know not a single person in my area who uses Biblatex. Another example is that I have a rather longish ~/.xinitrc file for automatic starting of several applications, like the PulseAudio sound server. Somehow, this is a problem others appearently do not have; it exists because I inflict to myself the pain of using Linux with i3 and Emacs, which I perceive as productive rather than painful, not to mention the privacy advantages. There was a time when I tried to convince people from my setup as the correct one for everyone, but today I know it is not. As an aside, the fact that many people write out citations manually has given rise to many of the quirks of German judicial citation styling, which are quite hard to describe in rule form. As one of the most astonishing examples, some people prefer to mark the loss or gain of name particles by bracketing the name particle when citing that person. This is impossible to cover in any form of automatic citation style. Luckily, I am not aware of any journal enforcing this rule. > Hm. I have to think about this. > > If this path is followed, then it might be hard to find target > groups willing to switch away from WYSIWYG tools which is the only > alternative I can think of here. > > I don't think that users of LaTeX/ConTeXt are part of the target > group. They would actually lose a bit of having control, I think. I take this note as an opportunity to talk about how I could see Orgdown to be used. I certainly cannot speak for other fields of science than the one I am involved in (alas, some even dispute that the Law discipline can be a science, but we do have actual journals), but you can take it as a piece of input in itself. Maybe others want to add to it. So, in the field of German Law 99% of the people use MS Word to write their articles, that is, WYSIWYG software. A significant amount of the people I talked to have some fair criticisms of MS Word, like: - it can get incredibly slow on large documents, especially if change tracking is enabled - it is sending data to Microsoft all the time, and Microsoft is trying to nudge people into the 365 services - compatibility problems when people use different versions of MS Word These are people who would gladly use a snappy, fast, and stable authoring tool for scientific articles, but do not see learning Emacs as an investment that would pay off. They rightfully think: journals demand DOCX files anyway, so why bother? Specifically, the very idea of dealing with source code is alien to them. It is something =E2=80=9Cwhat programmers do=E2=80=9D. If I could point these people to a tool that fixes these point= s and uses org markup, it would enable me to collaborate with them without using MS Word, instead using org markup. The org syntax itself is not problematic I suppose. For simply writing documents, it is easily learned. Far easier than LaTeX. Whether the tool is Free Software or not is not something that would matter in this context, though Free Software would of course be even better. Currently, the only option for this I am aware of is using Markdown with pandoc=E2=80=99s citation system. Now, a MS Word user will ne= ver use a commandline tool, so this option rules out itself. This is the space into which I would like to see orgdown-based tools enter. With some compatibility levels clearly defined, I imagine that developing such tools becomes significantly easier and avoids the problem of different incompatible flavours right from the start. I miss, for the purpose of recommendation, an easily learned GUI tool for editing a scientific markup which is also well supported by Emacs. Org since recently officially supports citations, so it makes the ideal candidate. So this is where I come from, rather than trying to convince people to write their repository READMEs in Org(down) rather than Markdown. Someone in this thread noticed that Org is useful even to experienced LaTeX users and I would shamelessly add myself in here. Specifically since citations have become available, I have entered a new world. Due to the quirks of German judicial citing, I previously needed to write custom Biblatex styles. Writing CSL files is much easier, and for the text-centric field of German Law science I do not need much of LaTeX=E2=80= =99s flexibility. Having it available within org is an added bonus. Still, I agree that you should not consider LaTeX users as a target group; they will come themselves when needed. But there is a significant amount of people who write complex documents not in LaTeX (in my case, because journals in my field of research demand DOCX), even though these people are most likely not to be found within the natural sciences. You should advertise your project on the emacs-humanities mailing list as well, it might yield some more input specific to this group of people. > And Overleaf might be too hard to beat I guess although I personally > don't like to use cloud-based services but meanwhile that's the > opinion of a tiny minority. > However, nice input and thankfully not just about the "horrible > name" for a change. Thank you for that. ;-) I enjoy this discussion and am curious about how it continues. -quintus --=20 Dipl.-Jur. M. G=C3=BClker | https://mg.guelker.eu | PGP: Siehe Webseite Passau, Deutschland | kontakt@guelker.eu | O<