Re: [proof of concept] inline language blocks

[Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>]

Juan Manuel Macías <maciaschain@posteo.net> writes:

> Ihor Radchenko writes:
>> This is a good idea, although it would be better to make this new markup
>> element within the framework of more general inline special block we
>> discussed in the past: https://list.orgmode.org/orgmode/87a6b8pbhg.fsf@posteo.net/
>
> Fun fact: the local branch is called inline-special-block, because I
> originally had that idea in mind when I created it. Then, halfway
> through, I doubted whether it wouldn't be better to have a specific
> inline language selector, whose use would be as direct as an emphasis
> mark. So in the branch there is also a "proto"-inline-special-block with
> similar syntax: &foo{}.
>
> I opted for the -language-block version because, as I said, its use is
> very 'direct' and covers a common need to segment multilingual text
> within the paragraph.

My main point is that we should use the same syntax with inline special
blocks. Similar to how #+begin_verse uses the same syntax as special
blocks.

We need to finalize inline special block syntax first, and then talk
about special cases like inline language markup you propose.

> I think at the time we also discussed whether or not it would be a good
> idea to provide the inline special blocks with options and attributes,
> like their older brothers. And how to do it. My biggest concern here is
> the (let's say) latexification of the paragraph. I mean, one of the
> great things about Org versus heavier markup like LaTeX is that when org
> wants to be verbose it uses dedicated lines, but usually keeps the
> paragraphs clean and readable. I think that any element inside the
> paragraph should tend to be as "transparent" as simple emphasis marks.
>
> I remember that there was also discussion about puting the options
> outside the paragraph, using some type of identifier. It doesn't seem
> like a bad idea to me, but I think it adds an extra complication for the
> user. It would be very tedious for me to write like this (even more
> tedious than writing in LaTeX).

I still believe that we should /allow/ options inside inline block-type
markup. This is often necessary in practice. For example, I recommend
studying
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Wikitext#Templates_and_transcluding_pages
and how they had to use ugly |... extensions to provide options.

But it does not mean that users /have to/ use these options. In fact, we
might design the inline language blocks to ignore options.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>