From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id WFeOOpBKM2CmCwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 06:09:20 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id +G9mNpBKM2CjfQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 06:09:20 +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 3529C14EB2 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 07:09:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:37442 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE4PH-0001PC-C4 for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:09:19 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46708) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE4OP-0000yL-4Q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:08:25 -0500 Received: from hiwela.pair.com ([209.68.5.201]:59336) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lE4ON-0001Bd-Cf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:08:24 -0500 Received: from hiwela.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hiwela.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C4169805BA; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:08:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from minshall-entroware-apollo.cliq.com (unknown [95.8.212.136]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hiwela.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B08B68F0957; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 01:08:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from apollo2.minshall.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minshall-entroware-apollo.cliq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A67630C3; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:08:15 +0300 (+03) From: Greg Minshall To: Tim Cross Subject: Re: 'false' list item In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 22 Feb 2021 14:26:03 +1100." <874ki47p4m.fsf@gmail.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7.1; GNU Emacs 27.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <699687.1613974095.1@apollo2.minshall.org> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 09:08:15 +0300 Message-ID: <699688.1613974095@apollo2.minshall.org> Received-SPF: softfail client-ip=209.68.5.201; envelope-from=minshall@umich.edu; helo=hiwela.pair.com X-Spam_score_int: -11 X-Spam_score: -1.2 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.27 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=umich.edu (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 3529C14EB2 X-Spam-Score: -2.27 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: mma9vziDWtNz Tim, > There is no plans to change anything as far as I know. What I wrote was > mainly to show why we have the situation and that any proposed solution > has its own drawbacks. thanks. (i assumed that, but ...) > Bottom line, we cannot easily prevent the 'false' list item issue > without introducing either other issues or adding some additional syntax > to indicate list items, which defeats the 'plain' aspects which many > appreciate in org. Even the proposed 'solutions' still suffer from false > positives. yeah. i sort of wonder if one can roughly categorize our typical uses of org-mode into two types: - random scribbles, agendas, etc., where the consumer is "ourselves" for the most part - more formal presentations (web sites, papers), where the consumer is the broader world and, to the extent this is true, i wonder if some markup issues have a tension between those two uses. e.g., for a formal document, i might be willing to have "heavier" markup, to eliminate (...) false positives/negatives. (another example is in-line math markup, with dollar signs or backslah-parens.) cheers, Greg