Other editors supporting Org-Mode

Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Manuel Schneckenreither]

Hi fellows,

I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.

The idea behind this is, that I like to do collaboration with several
other persons, which don't use emacs nor vim (they are "normal" Windows
users). As org mode uses raw text git could be used as control version
system, which handles merging, etc. So it would be perfect for
collaborating on a document.

This means, I am looking for an editor which works like a normal editor
(Word, gedit, etc) and supports Org mode.

Does anyone know such an editor?


Best regards

Manuel

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Albert Krewinkel]

Hi,

Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither@student.uibk.ac.at>
writes:

> I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
> you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.
>
> The idea behind this is, that I like to do collaboration with several
> other persons, which don't use emacs nor vim (they are "normal" Windows
> users). As org mode uses raw text git could be used as control version
> system, which handles merging, etc. So it would be perfect for
> collaborating on a document.
>
> This means, I am looking for an editor which works like a normal editor
> (Word, gedit, etc) and supports Org mode.

I always thought vim and emacs where normal and everything else is the
exception ;)

> Does anyone know such an editor?

I'm not aware of any editor capabale of that.  The best I can come up
with is to use markdown (or docx) as an exchange format and to convert
it back to org locally using pandoc.  That way you can at least continue
to use emacs and org, while your collaborators could use Writemonkey,
Word or something similar.

It's not a great solution, but since doing the right things
(i.e. teaching them emacs) seems out of the question, it's qutie likely
as good as it gets.

Cheers,
Albert

-- 
Albert Krewinkel
GPG: 8eed e3e2 e8c5 6f18 81fe  e836 388d c0b2 1f63 1124

-- 
Albert Krewinkel
GPG: 8eed e3e2 e8c5 6f18 81fe  e836 388d c0b2 1f63 1124

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Thorsten Jolitz]

Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither@student.uibk.ac.at>
writes:

Hi,

> I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
> you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.

I recently asked about browser editors that give some support for Org
syntax, but with no results. I think it would be really useful to have
some basic insertion/editing support for Org syntax in the Word
Prozessors used by the masses like MS Word and Clones and popular rich
text browser editiors, nothing fancy, just enough to make writing basic
Org docs comfortable.

Insertion snippets/skeletons would be a start, then maybe some 'quick
navigation' commands. To bad that we can't have this by writing a few
quick Emacs Lisp functions, somebody would need to know enough about
Java, JS, HTML5 etc. and have some insight into the popular editors to
make this happen. 

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[hymie!]

In our last episode, the evil Dr. Lacto had captured our hero,
  Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither@student.uibk.ac.at>, who said:
>Hi fellows,
>
>I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
>you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.

I would suggest, rather than adapting more editors to support Org,
creating a stand-alone program that "compiles" and manages Org functions
separate from the act of editing them.

The same way that I edit a TeX file, and then run "tex" to process
it into a DVI file that I can view; or the same way that I edit an
HTML file, and then pull it up in Firefox to view it.  I can edit
my Org file, then I can run my Org processor and view the file,
view my agenda...

I realize that there is a lot of functionality that gets lost, but I
think that much of what is lost is "shortcuts".  I can easily, for example,
change the word TODO to DONE in my editor, or add a SCHEDULED line...
On the other hand, you already have emacs as the "supported" Org editor,
while adding do-it-yourself support for other editors as well.

It just seems to me that writing Org For Emacs, Org For Vim, Org For
Notepad, Org For Whatever Mac Uses, Org for Vile ... is duplicating
too much effort that a single Org For Java might simplify.

Anyway, just thinking out loud.

--hymie!    http://lactose.homelinux.net/~hymie    hymie@lactose.homelinux.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Stefan Blaschke]

Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither <at> student.uibk.ac.at> 
writes:

> 
> Hi fellows,
> 
> I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
> you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.
> 

Hi,

there's a package for Sublime Text:
https://github.com/danielmagnussons/orgmode

cheers Stefan

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Thorsten Jolitz]

hymie@lactose.homelinux.net (hymie!) writes:

> In our last episode, the evil Dr. Lacto had captured our hero,
>   Manuel Schneckenreither
> <manuel.schneckenreither@student.uibk.ac.at>, who said:
>>Hi fellows,
>>
>>I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
>>you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.
>
> I would suggest, rather than adapting more editors to support Org,
> creating a stand-alone program that "compiles" and manages Org functions
> separate from the act of editing them.

but that program does exist already and is called Emacs, right?

I'm writing this email in Emacs instance

#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
 (emacs-pid)
#+END_SRC

#+results:
: 275

but external program PicoLisp can use another Emacs instance as
standalone program to execute Emacs Lisp (and thus all of Org-mode's
functionality):

#+BEGIN_SRC picolisp :results pp
 (de emx (Exe . @)
   (in
      (list 'emacs "--no-site-file" "--batch"
         (extract
            '((X)
              (cond
                 ((num? (car (info X)))
                     (pack "--load=" X) )
                 ((= `(char "(") (char X))
                     (pack "--eval=" X) ) ) )
            (rest) ) )
      (eval Exe) ) )

(emx '(read) "(princ (emacs-pid))")
#+END_SRC

#+results:
: 1388

Instead of (princ (emacs-pid)) you could just as well load org-mode and
then call (org-element-parse-buffer ...) or whatever.

PicoLisp is no editor, and there is no editor written in this
language, but assume Java or JS programs can do the same - how would
that help editing Org-mode syntax in editors that are written in that
languages?

Just curious, I would like to find a way to make editing Org syntax
easier for the masses (of non Emacs users).

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Jorge A. Alfaro-Murillo]

hymie! writes: 

> I would suggest, rather than adapting more editors to support 
> Org, creating a stand-alone program that "compiles" and manages 
> Org functions separate from the act of editing them.

Perhaps the easiest thing would be an emacs configuration that 
makes emacs just an org editor for Word users:

#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
  (setq-default major-mode 'org-mode)
  (setq initial-major-mode 'org-mode)
  (setq initial-buffer-choice "~/Untitled.org")
  (setq inhibit-startup-message t)
  (setq initial-scratch-message nil)
  (cua-mode)
  (require 'printing)
  (pr-update-menus)
 
#+END_SRC

And many many (define-key org-mode-map ...) to change default 
keybindings and make, e.g., C-a mark-whole-buffer, C-s 
save-buffer, C-p pr-txt-buffer, etc. It doesn't matter if the 
bindings lose their default binding as long as there is a way to 
activate the action in the menus.
 
The menus should be rewritten, and "Tools" and anything that can 
make you lose focus on the current buffer should be removed, 
"Buffers" should be renamed "Files opened", etc. There should be 
one whole menu for Org-export to avoid the *Org Export Dispatch* 
buffer and in general, any "special-mode derived" buffer should be 
avoided.

The toolbar should have many more org-only buttons that emacs-org 
users generally activate with keybindings: DEMOTE/PROMOTE, INSERT 
TIME, INSERT SOURCE BLOCK, etc.

This would be an emacs just to edit org-files (and perhaps also 
running code with babel). There wouldn't be access to the agenda, 
without the user freaking out and not knowing how to exit (unless 
it is always opened on a separate frame I guess). But I think 
achieving agenda capabilities in another editor would also be very 
difficult.

Best,
-- 
Jorge.

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Paul Rudin]

Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither-oe7qfRrRQffpYOdAUmGicbNldLUNz+W/@public.gmane.org>
writes:

> I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
> you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.

Depends what you mean by "supports". I sometimes have to use windows
computers on which I can't install emacs (long story). I edit some of my
.org files with notepad!

The advantage of plain text is that pretty much every text editor can be
used to read/modify the files, even if you can't do all the stuff that
you're used to with emacs.

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Thorsten Jolitz]

jorge.alfaro-murillo@yale.edu (Jorge A. Alfaro-Murillo) writes:

> hymie! writes: 
>
>> I would suggest, rather than adapting more editors to support 
>> Org, creating a stand-alone program that "compiles" and manages 
>> Org functions separate from the act of editing them.
>
> Perhaps the easiest thing would be an emacs configuration that 
> makes emacs just an org editor for Word users:

My intended use-case is editing Org syntax in HTML text-areas, and it
would be a marvellous solution to give the users a pre-configured
specialized Emacs(server) and help them to configure their web-brower(s)
to call emacs(client) as an external editor when editing text-areas in
web formulas.

Marvellous, but unfortunately a bit optimistic IMO and too
dangerous. When going this route, it should rather be Zile or Nano or
another preinstalled minimal editor (what would it be on Windows? what
on Apple) without Emac's (destructive) power.

Did anybody on the list tried to extend Zile/Nano/? or their MS Windows
or Apple equivalent, and can share experiences?

Or what about extending TinyMCE (http://www.tinymce.com/) for some Org
syntax support? I don't know how hard this would be, if at all possible,
but from the user-perspective this might be the easiest solution.

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[gregory mitchell]

> My intended use-case is editing Org syntax in HTML text-areas, and it
> would be a marvellous solution to give the users a pre-configured
> specialized Emacs(server) and help them to configure their web-brower(s)
> to call emacs(client) as an external editor when editing text-areas in
> web formulas.


I've been wanting to use ace.js for this purpose, but I haven't gotten
around to it yet.

https://github.com/ajaxorg/ace/wiki/Creating-or-Extending-an-Edit-Mode

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Thorsten Jolitz]

gregory mitchell <radiochickenwax@gmail.com> writes:

>> My intended use-case is editing Org syntax in HTML text-areas, and it
>> would be a marvellous solution to give the users a pre-configured
>> specialized Emacs(server) and help them to configure their web-brower(s)
>> to call emacs(client) as an external editor when editing text-areas in
>> web formulas.
>
>
> I've been wanting to use ace.js for this purpose, but I haven't gotten
> around to it yet.
>
> https://github.com/ajaxorg/ace/wiki/Creating-or-Extending-an-Edit-Mode

This looks pretty interesting too, no idea about the pros&cons in
comparison with TinyMCE. 

With all this online editors, it seems to be mostly about highlighting
and indentation (and maybe folding):

,----
| Defining a Mode
| 
| Every language needs a mode. A mode contains the paths to a
| language's syntax highlighting rules, indentation rules, and code
| folding rules. Without defining a mode, Ace won't know anything
| about the finer aspects of your language.
`----

but with Org-mode one would need commands like C-c C-t, C-c C-x p, C-c ,
etc etc too, i.e. smart/fast tag, property, priority, timestamp,
planning, table, list ... handling (only syntax level editing of
course). 

I don't know if this could at all be implemented with these extendable
web-editors. 

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Paul Rankin]

Manuel Schneckenreither <manuel.schneckenreither@student.uibk.ac.at>
writes:

> I couldn't find anything on the web about it. Therefore, I like to ask
> you if anyone knows a program (another editor) which supports Org mode.

Apologies, I posted this to your email instead of to the group:

You might want to give Trello a look (http://trello.com). It's
web-based, so there is little chance that your technically challenged
friends will break it.

There is a bi-directional sync package for Org Mode called `org-trello'.
It works okay, but obviously lacks many of the features of Org; it's
mostly aimed at task management with teams.

Re: Other editors supporting Org-Mode

[Manuel Schneckenreither]

Sorry for the late response from me.

I read all your ideas on how to solve that.

For now I made them to use the org-mode syntax. We'll see if that works
out tho.

To your suggestions:

@Jorge: I also had the idea of an emacs configuration which restricts to
org mode only. The good thing is that this editor would not need any
update whenever org mode changes, due to the fact that the real org mode
is used. A quite good argument.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to create such a configuration
right now. So I will postpone this solution.


@Albert: Yes, using markdown mode could also be a solution. However,
then we always got the converting back and forth which might cause
trouble. So it is not as satisfying as I wish it was, but still it could
work out.

@Paul: Trello seems quite interesting. However, I want to create
documents, which then are converted to latex and pdf. Due to the fact
that Trello is for task management, this doesn't really work out.


@Stefan: This Sublime extension might be the solution. Thanks for that
input.

@All others: Thanks for your inputs.


So I will try to let them use sublime with the orgmode plugin, and see
if it that works out. One more thing: This semester I got a class at
university which is called "Advanced C/C++ Programming". In that class
we will develop some project (which we can pick on our own). So I will
make the suggesting of creating an editor which is capable of displaying
org mode files (with the main focus on text files and not task
managment), similar to org mode and possibly even tex/pdf conversion.
The language for the program will of course be C++ and obviously this is
not negotiable.


Thanks for your input guys.

Manuel

--
To reply secure use GnuPG encryption:
Key Block to use (http://www.pinselzone.com/pgp/public_gpg_key.asc)
What is GnuPG? (http://www.gnupg.org/)