Hi Bastien, * Bastien <b...@gnu.org> wrote: > Hi Karl and Timothy, > > thank you Karl for reviving this important topic. > > I think our collective priority should be to work on > https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-synxtax.html so that it reflects the > current Org syntax. Hopefully we can do this before Org 9.6. As > discussed with TEC, we can factor out suggestions from this document > so that it is not a mix of facts and hypotheses.
A valid approach. I think we do have two different approaches ongoing here. With OD1 I tried to come up with a minimal set of Org-mode syntax elements that are very easy to implement in non-Emacs tools in order to get an easy intro to this universe. This is a bottom-up approach. Defining the whole Org-mode syntax as you've suggested is a complete definition of Orgdown (or OD∞ as of https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Orgdown-Levels.org ) which is a top-down approach. So far, I don´t see a conflict here. This may arise with OD2, OD3, ... definitions if they will ever exist. > Then we can work on suggestions for evolutions of the current Org-mode > syntax chunk by chunk, as a long-term goal for stabilizing changes for > Org 10 (2023 ?) Sounds great! > What occurred to me while rereading this thread is that definining a > syntax for a IETF RFC on an Org mimetype probably needs to be done not > just by this Emacs Org-mode community, but by bringing together other > "consumers" of .org files, from ecosystems outside of Emacs. > > Such a collective work could lead to define what subset of the Org > syntax is useful as the corner-stone for .org files everywhere - which > is what you rightfully brought up with "Orgdown". I tried to collect projects on https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool-Support.org > If successful, such a process could end up in defining the minimal and > official "Org syntax" while allowing implementations (like the one for > Emacs org-mode) to supercharge this syntax if deemed useful. To me, this sound aligned with the idea of OD levels OD1 and OD∞. > Perhaps TEC is right and we will end up having the minimal syntax > being the one we currently use for Org-mode: we'll see. > > But we need volunteers: one to work on worg/dev/org-synxtax.org (I'm > assuming TEC can lead the work here) and one to set up a discussion > with people implementing Org in various places (you ?). What kind of discussion is on your mind? At the moment, I tend to think that the Org-mode community should provide directions by developing a formal definition of the syntax and maybe later-on define viable sub-sets (the OD levels?) so that tool developers don't have to implement the whole large thing. At this stage, I don't know what discussions you're trying to start here. Can you elaborate? > I suggest to take this sequentially and not tackle the second work > before we're done with the first one. I interpret this as "discussions with tool developers after working on the formal Org definition". This would be my understanding and also my thought. -- get mail|git|SVN|photos|postings|SMS|phonecalls|RSS|CSV|XML into Org-mode: > get Memacs from https://github.com/novoid/Memacs < Personal Information Management > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/pim/ Emacs-related > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/emacs/