diff options
Diffstat (limited to '2021/talks/org-outside.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | 2021/talks/org-outside.md | 34 |
1 files changed, 33 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/2021/talks/org-outside.md b/2021/talks/org-outside.md index c0799e21..e13948b0 100644 --- a/2021/talks/org-outside.md +++ b/2021/talks/org-outside.md @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ # The use of Org mode syntax outside of GNU/Emacs Karl Voit +[[!taglink CategoryOrgMode]] + [[!inline pages="internal(2021/info/org-outside-schedule)" raw="yes"]] With the rising interest in Org mode, the GNU/Emacs community gained @@ -37,7 +39,21 @@ information. # Discussion +Pad: + +- Q1: Great talk. I have been following your work on PIM for a while + (incl. a sneak read of your dissertation:-). Just curious, what + would you personally use Orgdown for? + - A: Oh, this would be a very loooong answer. I think you want to + visit: + - <https://karl-voit.at/tags/emacs/> and go to other pages + like <https://karl-voit.at/2019/09/25/using-orgmode/> + - Basically, Orgdown is already part of my workflows since + years: <https://github.com/novoid/lazyblorg/> or + <https://github.com/novoid/appendorgheading/> and much more. + BBB: + - Hi Karl. I was wondering, does the specification make any restrictions with regard to indentation levels or hard vs. soft line breaks? Do you have any type of test suites that an implementation can use to be "certified" as orgdown(1)? - Are you worried about the different levels of orgdown leading to the same confusing situation we have with Markdown? - I think the ability to indicate that some tools are compatible with org is fantastic! @@ -60,12 +76,14 @@ BBB: - neorg seems to be an expanded org-mode syntax and is not compatible with orgmode BBB feedback: + - I think no tags is a good idea, very implementation specific - I think it's a fantastic idea, and the initial proposal is very good! - i need to go, but thanks for introducing the idea, excited to see where it goes! - Thanks for your proposal. I really hope it will work out. IRC: (nick: publicvoit) + - is there a tree-sitter parser for orgdown already? :P - it seems to me that as org evolves, either orgdown eventually becomes incompatible with org or org is prevented from changing because it would break orgdown. I guess backcompat with existing org documents constrains org-mode this way already, though - what level would you call github's implementation is? @@ -95,7 +113,21 @@ IRC: (nick: publicvoit) - I don't really see a big issue with org-mode vs. org vs. orgWHATEVER though - there are major search and discovery issues with bare "org" - I tend to use "org syntax" at the moment, but it isn't catchy enough - + + +From [YouTube](www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLuTYkhFDQY&feature=em-comments): + +- Great idea! I’m not sure about the name though. To me it implies it has something syntactically to do with Markdown (which it doesn’t). In my view OrgMode markup is far more expressive than Markdown. It’s almost a new markup language in and of itself. So, how about OrgMark or Org Mode Markup Language aka OMML. + +Links and other notes: + +- The article from 2017 that started the whole discussion: "Org Mode + Is One of the Most Reasonable Markup Languages to Use for Text" + <https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/> +- Orgdown homepage: <https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown> +- Orgdown motivation article: + <https://karl-voit.at/2021/11/27/orgdown/> + # Outline - The term Org mode stands for different things |