Re: Concrete suggestions to improve Org mode third-party integration :: an afterthought following Karl Voit's Orgdown proposal

[Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>]

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

> Yes, sorry for not explaining myself well: I was also referring to
> search results, not the title in the web site...
>
> But the question is: what need is there to remove the reference to Emacs
> in the search result? I think the emphasis is necessary. As we say in
> spanish, it's like putting the bandage on before the wound. If there are
> people who think that Org Mode can 'live' in some way outside of Emacs
> (a respectable opinion, but that I do not share, at least 100%), I think
> the burden of the work falls on them and not on us, the users of
> Emacs-Org-Mode. Anyway it is my simple and subjetive opinion, and it is
> not my intention to initiate a controversy with it.

Ok. Let me explain my thought process.

First of all, there is no burden on users of Org mode in making edits to
orgmode.org. It is a burden on Org contributors.

One of the aims of my proposal is reducing this burden by involving
non-emacs users to provide contributions to Org (e.g. by making more
tests for Org-element parser). To do it, we need to make the
contribution process for non-emacs developers easier. Ideally, without
too much effort on our side.

The idea of involving non-emacs users does have a potential because we
do know that third-party tools are already using Org. The problem is the
disconnect between those tools and Org mode proper.

The sources of the disconnect are (1) lack of technical "blueprints" for
Org that do not require knowing Elisp; (2) lack of discovereability of
Org mode as something that can live outside narrow field of Emacs. In
this branch of our discussion, I am going to talk about the second
point.

People simply do not expect to see a markup language when they encounter
a link with "Org mode for Emacs" title. Someone looking for Org mode
markup to be used in, say, websites will think that "Org mode for Emacs"
is limited to Emacs. Someone just interested in plain text markup will
find no relevance at all.

Title is important. If we care at all about orgmode.org website
appearing in search results, we want the title and the summary to have 2
main properties: (1) Provide search keywords to make it searchable by
potentially interested people; (2) Provide a title that immediately
signal that our website contains the information people are looking for.

Now, we need to understand what kind of people may be looking to
orgmode.org website.

1. Existing emacs users

   If a Emacs user is faced with "Org mode for Emacs", the word "Emacs"
   is indeed recognisable. On the other hand, the word "Org mode" does
   not provide much further info, except that it is a major (or maybe
   minor?) mode for "Org"??
   
   Now, consider "Org mode: your life in plain text".
   For emacs users, "Org mode" is not just a strange phrase, but a very
   clear indication that we are talking about Emacs.
   The "your life in plain text" provides extra information about what
   "Org mode" refers to. Clearly, text documents and "your life in plain
   text" should resonate with every Emacs user's soul.

   We can change the second variant of the title to contain "Emacs", but
   will it add much value? I am not convinced. On the other hand, making
   title too long or too complex _is_ bad. Long titles tend to be
   skipped (there was even formal research on this!)

2. Non-emacs users interested in plain text markup

   These users know nothing about Emacs and "Org mode" has no meaning
   for them as is. So, we do need something more descriptive.
   Adding "Emacs" may be fine, but it will serve no purpose for people
   not familiar with emacs. Just another unknown term making the title
   longer.

3. Non-emacs users interested in GTD/project management, etc
   "Org mode: your life in plain text" is somewhat relevant when people
   are looking to manage "life" (typically true for GTD enthusiasts).

   Though we can probably do better for this category.
   Maybe "Org mode: manage your life and notes in plain text"?
   Though it makes the title less relevant to group #2.

4. Researchers looking for ipython-like environment

   Not covered, except by reading my proposed site summary. I am not
   sure how we can improve title for this audience.

5. ??? (Suggestions are welcome)

Of course, better suggestions for the title are welcome. I just wanted
to make it clear the reasoning I do not like the current title and how
the proposed alternative is better (though not ideal).

Finally, I want to emphasise that our aim for search engines is not
advertising Emacs (we already do it by trapping users inside Org and
making them switch to Emacs by force :evil_laughter:). The aim is
encouraging people to use and contribute to Org mode in useful ways
(even unrelated to writing Elisp or, really, any code at all).

Search result is just an entrance for users to be curious about the new
beast of "Org mode". The website front page is the means to make users
try. And the Org mode itself is the way to make users fall in love with
Org in one way or another (even unrelated to Emacs [at least
initially]).

Best,
Ihor