From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Simplify `org-show-context' configuration
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 21:41:31 +0100
Message-ID: <87pp98uv7o.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <87lhjxh8q4.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<CAJcAo8v7FTAGpsxu0SHwu_RfR3_tkSHKzgAg0_DRVfm11xok+g@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50817)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YNowZ-0002Jw-Nq
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:40:32 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YNowU-0000L8-Ed
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:40:31 -0500
Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::198]:57876)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1YNowU-0000Ko-49
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:40:26 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAJcAo8v7FTAGpsxu0SHwu_RfR3_tkSHKzgAg0_DRVfm11xok+g@mail.gmail.com>
	(Samuel Wales's message of "Tue, 17 Feb 2015 12:05:31 -0700")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com>
Cc: Org Mode List <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> it would be good to also have semi-canonical [i.e.
> canonical-without-ancestor-body-text], where ancestor nodes do not
> show body text.  text can obscure structure.  i use this view for
> blogs.  otherwise i'd have to make fake headlines just to hide text.

I don't understand. Body text is not shown in ancestors. Considering the
following buffer:

    * Grandmother
    ** Uncle
    *** Heir
    ** Father
       Ancestor text
    *** Sister
        Sibling text
    *** Self
        Match
    **** First born
         Child text
    **** The other child
    *** Brother
    ** Aunt

`canonical' view is

    * Grandmother
    ** Uncle
    ** Father
    *** Sister
    *** Self
        Match
    **** First born
    **** The other child
    *** Brother
    ** Aunt

> does full show the entry below the headline that point is on?  i
> wouldn't use this view if it is not canonical [i.e. does not show
> children also].

`full', as its name suggests, shows complete subtree: all children and
their contents.

> do we presume that the entire buffer's visibility is changed for
> showing context, or are things that already shown left showing?

`canonical' change visibilty in subtree, so some parts of it could be
hidden in the process. Other views only augment current visibility.


Regards,