[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] Proposal for new document-level syntax

From: Nicolas Goaziou
Subject: Re: [O] Proposal for new document-level syntax
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2019 22:39:57 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux)


Gustav Wikström <address@hidden> writes:

> No worries. I think I explained but it can be further detailed. What I
> mean is that any property you can think of should be possible to add
> to a document as a keyword with the syntax:
> #+{PROPERTY}: {Value}

IIRC, Org uses

  #+PROPERTY: {key} {value}

Why "should" it be possible to use a different syntax?

> But only at the beginning of a file, before any other content. The
> only reason for defining properties like that is for them to be
> visible outside of the property drawer. I'm thinking mostly of
> =#+TITLE= and similar keywords.
> I'd like to depricate =#+PROPERTY:= since it breaks the outline
> hierarchy and doens't follow the convention for how properties are
> defined inside headlines.

So the reason for this change is that keywords break the outline
hierarchy? Well, keywords do not belong to the outline hierarchy in the
first place. But syntax is not very different, either.

> Removing the "old" way of defining properties for the whole buffer
> will make property-syntax defined the same for documents and
> headlines. With the slight extention of allowing arbitrary keywords to
> stand for properties at the beginning of the buffer. Note that we
> already have "document property keywords" in org-mode. Less limited
> since they're not positionally contained. And only for a limited set
> of keywords; the "export keywords". (See [[info:org#Export Settings]])

"Document property keyword" has no syntactical meaning. It is used for

> In my opinion property drawers is the improvement which in time will 
> make the existing property-keyword redundant.

I still don't get how this is an improvement. What would you be able to
do with properties drawers that you cannot do currently with regular
keywords? This is a genuine question: I don't want to turn down your
suggestion, but I think it entails a lot of changes, and I want to be
sure there is a real benefit to it.


Nicolas Goaziou

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]