From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kaushal Modi Subject: Re: Fix org-meta-return for checkbox lists Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:01:19 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87zhzx8b3o.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87k1r0p34i.fsf@norang.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003b0f7c056eaea76f" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53424) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTpII-0007Lw-W8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:01:44 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTpIE-00089D-F4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:01:39 -0400 Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]:44383) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fTpIE-00087K-85 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 10:01:34 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id p23-v6so3104535lfh.11 for ; Fri, 15 Jun 2018 07:01:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87k1r0p34i.fsf@norang.ca> 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.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Bernt Hansen Cc: emacs-org list , Nicolas Goaziou --0000000000003b0f7c056eaea76f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hello Nicolas, Brent, On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:53 AM Bernt Hansen wrote: > I agree. I use lists with mixed checkboxes and no checkboxes and do not > want to enforce checkboxes on every list item. > OK, I can understand if the behavior is kept as it is. Is it that common to have mix of checkboxes and unordered lists items? I would think that this behavior of org-meta-return is more consistent: - If you are on a "* foo" line, M-RET creates "* " on the next line. - If you are on a "1. foo" line, M-RET creates "2. " on the next line. - If you are on a "- foo" line, M-RET creates "- " on the next line. - *But* if you are on a "- [ ] foo" line, M-RET still creates "- " instead of "- [ ] " on the next line? Shouldn't M-RET and M-S-RET behavior be switched for checkbox lists? -- Kaushal Modi --0000000000003b0f7c056eaea76f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Nicolas, Brent,

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 9:53 AM Bernt= Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrot= e:
I agree.=C2=A0 I use lists with = mixed checkboxes and no checkboxes and do not
want to enforce checkboxes on every list item.

OK, I can understand if the behavior is kept as it is.
Is it that common to have mix of checkboxes and unordered list= s items?

I would think that this behavior of org-m= eta-return is more consistent:

- If you are o= n a "* foo" line, M-RET creates "* " on the next line.<= /div>
- If you are on a "1. foo" line, M-RET creates "2. " on= the next line.
- If you are on a "- foo" line, M-RET creates "- = " on the next line.
- *But* if you are on a "- [ ] foo" line, M-RET still creates &qu= ot;- " instead of "- [ ] " on the next line?

<= /div>
Shouldn't M-RET and M-S-RET behavior be switched for checkbox= lists?
--

Kaushal Modi

--0000000000003b0f7c056eaea76f--