[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "Why is emacs so square?"
From: |
Joost Kremers |
Subject: |
Re: "Why is emacs so square?" |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Apr 2020 08:36:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.4.1; emacs 27.0.91 |
On Thu, Apr 23 2020, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Actually, it's crucial to mention that. You might say it's
Org's
raison d'ĂȘtre. It's what makes integrating all of Org's
functions
so tightly possible.
If features are well integrated and work together well, how is
it
important to know that they do it because of a certain way of
formatting text?
Because the user has to format that text. :-) Sure, there are
helper functions for a lot of things, but as a user you do need to
know the Org format.
But at the same time it should be made clear from the outset
that
Org's strength lies in its integration. I mean, I could use
Markdown with Pandoc to write my papers, *cough* Google
Calendar
*cough* to keep track of my appointments, Jupyter for keeping
programming notebooks and *cough* Evernote *cough* to keep
notes,
but there would be no way to link all of that. With Org, there
is.
You are actually describe the strength of Emacs as an integrated
package whose parts work well with one another. And yet we have
separate manuals for major parts: Gnus, Org, Eshell, etc. --
just look
inside doc/misc/.
Yes, but it's a different level of integration. I need a decent
working knowledge of Elisp to be able to integrate Gnus and
Eshell. But I only need to know Org syntax in order to integrate
my TODO list, task management and writing with my calendar. The
point is, I need to know Org syntax anyway to do each single thing
separately. Integrating them doesn't require a deeper level of
knowledge than I already have.
IOW, I don't see a contradiction here.
I'm not saying there's a contradiction. If that's how I came
across, then I didn't make my point very well. Like I said, I
think the Org documentation would benefit greatly if your
suggestions were implemented. It's just that the fact that Org's
different parts are tightly integrated should not be tucked away
in some "Advanced Use" section of the manual.
--
Joost Kremers
Life has its moments
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", (continued)
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Richard Stallman, 2020/04/20
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Joost Kremers, 2020/04/21
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Richard Stallman, 2020/04/21
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Nicolas Goaziou, 2020/04/22
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/22
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Richard Stallman, 2020/04/22
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Joost Kremers, 2020/04/23
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/23
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?",
Joost Kremers <=
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Stefan Kangas, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Joost Kremers, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Richard Stallman, 2020/04/23
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Joost Kremers, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Eli Zaretskii, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Robert Pluim, 2020/04/24
- Re: "Why is emacs so square?", Richard Stallman, 2020/04/24