Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

karl-voit.at

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 221 posts

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#31

Post by arboles »

1313ed01 wrote: post #19
arboles wrote: post #12

Does Org have a mechanism for escaping its own syntax? Last time I searched, to type *this* (keeping the asterisks) you had to insert a zero-width space (U+200B). In markdown you just escape them with \*this\*.

Did you edit your comment? I was about to begin by saying I could not see how you escaped that, but now I see the backslashes. Looks like even the documentation for org-mode recommends using zero-width spaces: https://orgmode.org/manual/Escape-Character.html I think org-mode was never primarily about its rendered output. Most users probably, like me, spend a lot of time (hours every day) in various org-mode documents…

That was some bad luck. I made an edit seconds after the post came rendered to get the formatting right. (On HN I expected to have to type \\\* to render \* but you just have to type \\*)

I understand your use case, I just think it makes it not worthy of comparisons to markdown.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#32

Post by crazygringo »

babarock wrote: post #27
jameshart wrote: post #13

Sure. And driving on the left is one of the most reasonable sides of the road to drive on, but in a country where everyone drives on the right, it’s good to accept that, though driving on the left offers just as many advantages, nonetheless you shouldn’t insist on continuing to do so. Markdown is also one of the most reasonable markup languages to use for text, and it has won sufficient share that it should be your d…

Are you suggesting I should pick the markup format for my private files according to the perceived popularity of another format? I'm not sure what's your point. Are you telling people who use org-mode that they shouldn't?

If you think you'll ever want to use third-party tools to process that markup, or if some of your private files will transform into public files at some point, then yes, considering popularity makes a lot of sense.

If they're just text files you edit raw that will never interact with anything else but your text editor, then of course popularity doesn't matter at all. But in my experience, my use cases tend to expand over time.

The article even talks about org mode's interoperability, mainly about the fact that pandoc supports it. And then bizarrely ignores the fact that it has much less ecosystem support than Markdown. So this is very much a subject the article itself brings up, and something that therefore also deserves to be critiqued.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#33

Post by imiric »

skeledrew wrote: post #23
arboles wrote: post #12

Does Org have a mechanism for escaping its own syntax? Last time I searched, to type *this* (keeping the asterisks) you had to insert a zero-width space (U+200B). In markdown you just escape them with \*this\*.

What's the use case for escaping its syntax? At top level it's just an arbitrarily nested list.

In an Org document that contains Org examples (e.g. if this article had been written in Org), even Emacs gets confused about rendering it. So you might find that sections in example text are evaluated as being part of top-level sections and collapsing is wonky, etc.

I run into this a lot with gptel. I use a main Org file for all my daily notes, and since gptel streams LLM output as Org (which is good), it conflicts with my main file. I have a post-processing function that converts headings into `#` to avoid this, but it's a hack I'd rather not do.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#34

Post by noufalibrahim »

jasperry wrote: post #16
noufalibrahim wrote: post #5

Org format is reasonably intuitive (so is markdown). But org's real power comes from org-mode and the rest of Emacs. Being able to use it as PIM, as a quick way to write documents and export them, as a way to take notes, the keystrokes which are almost automatic for any Emacs user etc. This is really why it shines. I don't see much value for it as just a markdown format outside Emacs.

The value of Org outside Emacs would be the same value that Markdown has, if it had wider adoption. Voit's post makes a strong argument for Org syntax's ability to serve for all the things Markdown currently does, while being more consistent and concise than Markdown, and so he pushes for it to be more widely adopted. We know that in tech, the better format doesn't always win at first, or ever, but we can advocate!

Fair enough. We can argue about the betterness of org but even if so, its enough better enough to push our something as popular as Markdown. The real item of value is org mode.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#35

Post by wibbily »

jameshart wrote: post #13

Sure. And driving on the left is one of the most reasonable sides of the road to drive on, but in a country where everyone drives on the right, it’s good to accept that, though driving on the left offers just as many advantages, nonetheless you shouldn’t insist on continuing to do so. Markdown is also one of the most reasonable markup languages to use for text, and it has won sufficient share that it should be your d…

Markdown (subjectively) looks better than Org when it’s plaintext - postfix headers and dashed lists are annoying to parse but they distinguish sections visually. Org by comparison feels like a sea of asterisks.

(I am tickled by the /italic/ syntax though…)

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#36

Post by arboles »

skeledrew wrote: post #23
arboles wrote: post #12

Does Org have a mechanism for escaping its own syntax? Last time I searched, to type *this* (keeping the asterisks) you had to insert a zero-width space (U+200B). In markdown you just escape them with \*this\*.

What's the use case for escaping its syntax? At top level it's just an arbitrarily nested list.

So you can type *word* without it becoming bold? So an article can contain: "The logs come to about ~300 lines once you start the server with ~systemctl start fnord~"

The `code` equivalent in Org is ~code~. How do you type that without the Org highlighting removing the ~ from "~300 lines", thinking that the code snippet begins there? This is an example I got from grepping my org files for U+200B.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#37

Post by crazygringo »

seawsurf wrote: post #24
jameshart wrote: post #13

Sure. And driving on the left is one of the most reasonable sides of the road to drive on, but in a country where everyone drives on the right, it’s good to accept that, though driving on the left offers just as many advantages, nonetheless you shouldn’t insist on continuing to do so. Markdown is also one of the most reasonable markup languages to use for text, and it has won sufficient share that it should be your d…

It's a matter of taste, isn't it? It's like LaTeX vs. Typst. You create the environment that works best for you.

In my experience, not really. I'd love to use Typst, you have no idea -- but when most journals require you to use their LaTeX template, then my personal taste doesn't really enter into the equation.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#38

Post by tialaramex »

babarock wrote: post #27
jameshart wrote: post #13

Sure. And driving on the left is one of the most reasonable sides of the road to drive on, but in a country where everyone drives on the right, it’s good to accept that, though driving on the left offers just as many advantages, nonetheless you shouldn’t insist on continuing to do so. Markdown is also one of the most reasonable markup languages to use for text, and it has won sufficient share that it should be your d…

Are you suggesting I should pick the markup format for my private files according to the perceived popularity of another format? I'm not sure what's your point. Are you telling people who use org-mode that they shouldn't?

One of the advantages of "going with the flow" when you can is that you benefit from numbers. You're a market of one, but by "going with the flow" the total market is huge.

Even if for me personally 185V mains power would be better, I can't buy gear for 185V, none of the electricians around here know how to work with it, the cables and sockets and everything else are defined around the prevailing systems at 220-250V here.

Maybe in my kitchen a 520mm dishwasher would be great, but alas dishwashers you can buy here are 600mm or 450mm ("slimeline") models, so 520mm isn't available.

With my poor hearing 14-bit PCM would be absolutely fine, but Sony's "Compact Disc" used 16-bit so that's what everybody uses and records by default.

If you work with Markdown, there are a lot of existing tools which are ready to use. There are tools for Org Mode, but maybe not as many.

There's definitely a sliding scale here. Refusing to use Twitter because it's full of Nazis is very different from refusing to conform to society's expectation that you wear clothes outside for example. There are people willing to spend most of their lives in jail because they refuse to wear clothes but almost all of us don't think that's a principle we care about enough to prioritise (also some of us get cold).

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#39

Post by drob518 »

wibbily wrote: post #35
jameshart wrote: post #13

Sure. And driving on the left is one of the most reasonable sides of the road to drive on, but in a country where everyone drives on the right, it’s good to accept that, though driving on the left offers just as many advantages, nonetheless you shouldn’t insist on continuing to do so. Markdown is also one of the most reasonable markup languages to use for text, and it has won sufficient share that it should be your d…

Markdown (subjectively) looks better than Org when it’s plaintext - postfix headers and dashed lists are annoying to parse but they distinguish sections visually. Org by comparison feels like a sea of asterisks. (I am tickled by the /italic/ syntax though…)

I don’t like using “-“ for bullets and “*” for headings. I do love underlines for underlined text, slash for italics, and asterisks for bold. Other than that, po-tay-to, po-tah-to. Let’s all just pick one and use it consistently. I do agree with the argument that says “Markdown” is meaningless and you’re always forced to ask “What do you mean by that? Which flavor, exactly?” But that happens with anything “lightweight” as it is inevitably extended to deal with more complex demands and becomes more heavyweight in the process.

Re: Org Mode syntax is one of the most reasonable markup languages for text (2017)

#40

Post by tikhonj »

jameshart wrote: post #26
seawsurf wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a matter of taste, isn't it? It's like LaTeX vs. Typst. You create the environment that works best for you.

For personal workflows, yes. In your own backyard, you decide what side of the road you drive on. But when building a product for other people to use - a messaging tool like slack or a commenting platform like GitHub code review…?

GitHub has at least some support for org-mode rendering. Which is a good reminder that a lot of this stuff really doesn't have to be a stark either-or choice—a lot of standardization isn't inevitable or natural or necessary, but just a choice we happen to make, often for systemic reasons that aren't inherently justified (legibility/etc).
Post reply on HN