From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Robert Klein" Subject: Re: text color + highlight Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 09:37:14 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87pqxw5cb1.fsf@gnu.org> <87mxszcsuv.fsf@gmail.com> <87d3tvru38.fsf@gmail.com> <87iq3kkef1.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53105 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OiMvE-0007Ta-Tm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:37:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OiMvD-0008Kf-9r for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:37:24 -0400 Received: from gate1.mpip-mainz.mpg.de ([194.95.63.248]:25517) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OiMvD-0008KR-1f for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Aug 2010 03:37:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Eric Schulte , Carsten Dominik Cc: Vinh Nguyen , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Bastien Am 09.08.2010, 08:28 Uhr, schrieb Carsten Dominik : > Nope, I am against this syntax. If we introduce a more general syntax, > then it should be done in the way Samuel proposed. WHich means > we firs get a keyword indtroducing the piece, and then properties. > > Like > > $[style :color red the red text] > > or > > $[face :color :italic t red the red text] > > Something like the $ before "[" also would seem critical to disambiguate > from other uses of "[". I'd prefer this kind of syntax, too. Btw, shouldn't the syntax be: $[face :color red :italic t the red italic text] ?? (i.e. the red following the :color keyword, not the ':italic t') I didn't find a canonical way to make a paragraph or a longer text passage italic > > However, I am not too excited about extra syntax to get this kind of > thing. > Would not oppose it, but probably never use it. > > - Carsten >