Hello, Eric S Fraga <esfli...@gmail.com> writes:
> I use inlinetasks all the time and for a number of different use > cases. My initial reaction is that I would not like to see them > disappear! For once (!), this is not what I'm suggesting. :) I wonder if it is meant to stay an external module, like, e.g., "org-bibtex.el", or become automatically integrated in default Org, like, e.g., "org-tables.el". Inline tasks are the odd ball, because they are almost integrated -- e.g., full support in "ox.el" and "org-element.el" -- but yet not autoloaded. > I do agree that their implementation would appear to be a little > clunky and maybe other solutions or implementations would be possible. Besides, inline tasks are not required to look like headlines. For example, diary S-exps do not look like headlines and yet appear in the agenda: %%(org-anniversary 1956 5 14) Arthur Dent is %d years old I'm not even convinced they need to hold contents per se. If we imagine that a new syntax would be "!!" at the beginning of a line, one line per task, we can couple any task to the drawer for contents, e.g.; !! TODO Go to the grocery :grocery-list: - carrots - bread :end: So, the drawer doesn't belong to the task, but still is adequately placed to permit the association between the two. > So, you have motivated me to look at alternatives just in case. I've > started playing with the export settings for drawers for odt and > LaTeX. It does seem like I can move to using drawers instead of inline > tasks for all of my uses *except* for actual tasks. I agree inline tasks can fill a role, but this role has to be clearly defined so we can think about a proper syntax. Again, something like the following is possible: !! TODO Go to the grocery :tag: SCHEDULED: <...> DEADLINE: <...> One problem is that, unfortunately, the current syntax somewhat works, whereas a new syntax would require more work to be effective (e.g., included in the agenda, in sparse trees...). Anyway, I'm just thinking out loud. > It would nice to have some improved navigation and search > facilities for drawers which, knowing org, probably already exist? I don't think anything like this exists. Drawers have two purposes: hide stuff away, and allow selective export. > It would also be useful to be able to narrow a view to the drawer > contents. This is `C-x n e' on a drawer boundary. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou