Re: Concatenate properties

[Tyler Grinn]

Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> writes:

> Tyler Grinn <tylergrinn@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>
>>> I like the variable idea. I would make it a concatenation string for
>>> joining. That way “” would concatenate the way Tyler wants, “ “ would
>>> preserve current behavior, and “,” could lead to a comma separated
>>> list for example. Other things like “\n” might lead to a column, etc. 
>>
>> I'm not a huge fan of the variable idea because it would make it
>> impossible to include both behaviors in a single file, whereas extending
>> the syntax maintains any existing properties that used '+'.
>
> I think I need to elaborate what I meant by "similar to
> org-use-property-inheritance".
>
> org-use-property-inheritance docstring:
>
>>>> When nil, only the properties directly given in the current entry
>>>> count. When t, every property is inherited. The value may also be a
>>>> list of properties that should have inheritance, or a regular
>>>> expression matching properties that should be inherited.
>
> Similarly, concatenation of PROPERTY+ can be controlled on per-property
> basis.
>
> Best,
> Ihor

Could you provide an example of what the value of that variable would be
if, for instance, I wanted PROP_A and PROP_B to be joined with a single
space and PROP_C and PROP_D to be concatenated? Or better yet, have the
default be to join with a single space for any property and have only
PROP_C and PROP_D concatenated?