Daniele Nicolodi <dani...@grinta.net> writes: > On 02/11/2020 00:10, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: >> >> Daniele Nicolodi <dani...@grinta.net> writes: >>> Maybe the standardization should cover only the "static" parts of Org >>> (ie no table formulas, no babel, no agenda, no exporters, etc). However, >>> in this case, what is left is little more of a markup language with an >>> editor that allows sections folding. You can have this on top of pretty >>> much any markup language using Emacs' outline-minor-mode. >> >> It could become stronger competition for asciidoc by being available in >> more places. > > Why does Org need to compete with asciidoc? I don't see any advantage in > fighting with anyone for market share.
That’s something really personal: I would prefer to use org at work :-) >> Having an acceptance criterion for “supports basic org-mode >> presentation” and “can edit org-files without breaking editing in >> org-mode” could help adoption. > > Acceptance criterion for what? Adoption of what? Acceptance criterion for „this is good enough to show an org-mode document at gitlab/sr.ht/…“. A minimum requirement so people who write a new library have something to target. Adoption: For example for editing in the browser. It would be nice to have basic editing support in gitlab — with sufficient support for users to not break org. There are many places where people cannot actually run full Emacs, because Emacs can do far too much. If you have an online editor and anyone can file a pull-request, you really won’t want to have support for running arbitrary code. But in the actual export you might want it (after checking what you’ll run). #+begin_src bash :exports results echo rm -rf / echo 0day-exploit-against-docker #+end_src > It seems to me that some see a the adoption of a simplified version of > the Org markup language outside Emacs and the org-mode implementation as > something desirable. However, I don't see what the Org community would > gain from that. I am missing ways to allow people to do small changes. For example to enable people to change text in my RPG in an online-editor (i.e. gitlab) and file a pull-request without ever leaving the browser. Building a full org-mode parser is a daunting task for all but those who don’t know enough to do it well. So people who start will most likely not know enough to get a basic parser right. Defining a subset as basic-org-target would give people a target they can actually aim for. And then defer to full Emacs, if they want to do more. > As explained many times now, you don't a formal specification for this: > the specification is the org-mode implementation itself. I won’t argue against that because I see it the same way :-) Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein ohne es zu merken
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
