Re: Is the cascading logic of outlines a feature, or a design bug?

[tomas]

On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 06:47:37AM +, a...@bitrot.link wrote:

> Likewise, is the inability to close an org-mode outline section without
> starting a new section really a feature? [...] Or is
> the restriction really just a bug with seniority, and the difficulty of
> fixing it (or the compatibility headaches caused by fixing it) would
> outweigh the benefits?

I guess the answer depends on your perspective. Try to reformulate
your question in another way, perhaps then it leads to something.

I must admit I've missed the possibility for Org to continue a
section after a deeper level one from time to time. I've resorted
to "local conventions" (e.g. a headline with "-" as a title).

But all in all, that's what Org's document model is, and you won't
change it because it's (sometimes) more convenient to you. What
you might try is to find enough people to agree in a common way
to work around it, if necessary.

Cheers
-- 
t


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Is the cascading logic of outlines a feature, or a design bug?

[abq]

https://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#closing-outline-sections answers 
the question:

"Can I close an outline section without starting a new section?"

The answer given is:
"no. Org-mode adheres to the cascading logic of outlines, in which a 
section is closed only by another section that occupies an equal or 
greater level."


Is that limitation a feature, or a design bug? E.g. if someone proposes 
enhancing the Unix directory system to support multiple files with the 
same filename in one directory, the proposal would be rejected, with the 
explanation that the limitation of only one file per filename is a 
feature, not a bug, since it enables the name to uniquely identify the 
file. (If you want to claim it's a bug, please at least edit your 
subject line, or preferably start a new thread.)


Likewise, is the inability to close an org-mode outline section without 
starting a new section really a feature? If so, what benefit does the 
restriction provide, that would be lost by relaxing the restriction? Or 
is the restriction really just a bug with seniority, and the difficulty 
of fixing it (or the compatibility headaches caused by fixing it) would 
outweigh the benefits?


Andy