i think i can't add much useful to these threads, i agree with the simplicity, but, a nuance, want for org to have had a bit more consistency growing up. e.g. quoting/escaping, demarcation, and applicability of features in different contexts.
sort of a "mentally factored user interface" where the user's expectation is pretty straightforwardly met. e.g. works here so should also work there. or, there is only one rule for doing this. that kind of thing. orthogonality also. few exceptions. it is understandable in context that inconsistencies exist, and that might apply to various maintenance-over-heavy things users want. if we are to remove features as suggested below, then i suggest, where possible, consistency be a desideratum for final result. On 12/5/21, Russell Adams <rlad...@adamsinfoserv.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 04, 2021 at 10:51:47AM +1100, Tim Cross wrote: >> >> Tom Gillespie <tgb...@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > I don't mean to be a wet blanket... > > I'd like to be a wet blanket. > >> +infinity! >> >> Please, please can we stop trying to satisfy every edge case or extend >> the markup to satisfy every possible scenario. > > +infinity^2 > > I've often thought Org needs to hit the brakes and stop adding > features, or cut out features that have a high support/maintenance > cost. We need to respect our maintainers' time. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Russell Adams rlad...@adamsinfoserv.com > > PGP Key ID: 0x1160DCB3 http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/ > > Fingerprint: 1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F 66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3 > > -- The Kafka Pandemic A blog about science, health, human rights, and misopathy: https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com
