Re: #+STARTUP: showstars

["Mark E. Shoulson" <mark@kli.org>]

Enda <enda_k2@yahoo.com> writes:
>>> Otherwise is like in vi, the additional stars (like **, opposed to
>>> <SPACE>*) are too noisy, and since I do not want to see them whether
>>> it is in org-mode or in vi, etc, so I wondered was there a way to have
>>> the file like
>>>
>>> * first level heading
>>> =C2=A0* second level heading
>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 * third level heading
>>
There seems to be some confusion getting across.  As I understand it, 
this is what the OP is after:

Problem: doesn't like the look of multiple *s for headline; prefers the 
look of hidestars-mode.

Furthermore, hidestars isn't good enough, because Enda wants the file 
*really to be like that*, without the stars there at all, so that it 
still looks good when being edited in vi or something.  It needs to look 
like hidestars *all the time*, even outside of org, to avoid seeing the 
****s.

OP's requested fix: change the syntax so that a line which begins with N 
spaces followed by a star and then more spaces after that acts as if the 
N spaces at the beginning were stars.  That is, <space><space>*<space> 
at the start of the line should be a third-level headline, as if it 
started with ***.

OP, please let me know if I'm stating your position correctly.

Problem with requested fix: In addition to being a pretty major change 
to start with, it also already conflicts with established usage.  A line 
that starts with spaces and then a star-space is considered an item in a 
plain list.  Using *s for plain lists is discouraged, because of the 
potential confusion with headlines if there are no spaces before it, but 
it is permitted (and if it could have been dropped it would have been 
already).  So, no, this isn't going to happen.

I _guess_ one could try defining something like a NO-BREAK-SPACE 
character to behave like a star at the beginning of the line when it 
comes to determining headlines, so you basically have a character that 
*looks* blank you can use for the non-final stars, but that would also 
be a pretty enormous change and I don't see it looking like a good move 
either.

I hope that accurately portrays the request (and responses thereto).

~mark