On 2021-11-29 03:33, Michael Ashton wrote:
On Nov 28, 2021, at 6:22 PM, Jim Porter <jporterb...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/28/2021 11:46 AM, Karl Voit wrote:
At this year's EmascsConf, I had a 12 minute video where I explain
why
we do need a different name for the syntax of Org-mode in contrast to
the Elisp implementation of GNU/Emacs Org-mode.
I would like you to read my rationale and motivate you to use the
term
"Orgdown" for the syntax and "Orgdown1" for the first (very basic)
level of Orgdown syntax elements.
I agree that it's useful to distinguish the files/syntax from the
*mode*, which contains many functions for doing things with those
files.
For what it's worth (perhaps not much), I've always referred to the
syntax/file format as simply "Org"; for example, "I put my notes into
an Org file." This is by analogy with most of the other Emacs major
modes for editing files. I write Python in `python-mode', I write C++
in `c++-mode', I write text files in `text-mode', and so on.
Maybe "Org" isn't distinct enough though. People unfamiliar with
Org-Mode might confuse "Org" with "org charts" or some other use of
the word. Still, if we look to other tools that can read the same
files as Org-Mode, they tend to be called things like "Organice", not
"Orgmodeanice". :)
Perhaps orgtext or org-text?
Hi Karl and Org fellows,
I do understand that it has always been a tricky topic, since Org Mode
and its format are intrinsically linked.
I think what you are bringing is useful, I can feel how a syntax for a
"standard" Org format subset would be useful (maybe we could keep open a
way to customize it by exporting Lisp params values as part of a
document annex, but that's beyond the current status, just to say I
understand why you bring that :).
I have to say, however, that I am not very enthusiast with the name that
you came by for this.
At first, because I feel Org format and Markdown are different beasts ;
eventhough I do use Markdown, I prefer Org alot, so it sounds strange to
have a reference to Markdown in Org format name.
But, really more because I feel like Org stands on its own, and it does
not need to help itself as a comparison to Markdown to get its own
renown, or to explain what it is.
In previous mails, "Org Syntax" and "Org Markup" sounded good to me.
However, I do like "org-text" or "Org Text" a lot, or why not even
"OrgText", but I favor the first two, which refer to the way we write
"org-mode" the Emacs Mode and "Org Mode" in documents.
After all, this is exactly what it is about, "Writing text in Org", and
what it is essentially "text characters arranged according to Org
format".
Have a good day,
Christophe
--
---------------> https://www.citadels.earth
Once it's perfectly aimed, the flying arrow goes straight to its target.
Thus, don't worry when things go right.
There will be enough time to worry about if they go wrong.
Then, it's time to fire a new arrow towards another direction.
Don't sink. Adapt yourself ! The archer has to shoot accurately and
quickly.
[Words of Erenthar, the bowman ranger] <---------------<<<<
