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

111–120 of 221 posts

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

#111

Post by jameshart »

skeledrew wrote: post #88
drob518 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure I see the benefit in that.

Org is essentially the parent of _all_ other plaintext formats, and is able to treat them specifically at the native level. So for example there's a single command to run a code block, but the code runner is correctly resolved. And multiple blocks in different languages can communicate with each other. Entire projects can be placed in a single org files and still operate as though they're separate files. Literate pro…

The argument being made is not ‘org-mode is a reasonable alternative to a filesystem for organizing textual files’, it is ‘org-mode is a reasonable lightweight textual markup language’.

The fact you can replace entire project and documentation systems with org-mode is not an argument in favor of its lightweight text markup.

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

#112

Post by indymike »

Org mode is great for outline like documents.

Markdown is great for paragraph-like documents.

I've used both for a long time, and have found markdown to be a poor replacement for org-mode and org-mode to be a bad replacement for markdown.

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

#113

Post by dandersch »

IshKebab wrote: post #108

Hmm with the way people go on about it I always assumed there was more to Org mode than "Markdown for Emacs", but this post makes it sound exactly like that. He's also not exactly gaining credibility with "Markdown is useless because it's not standardised; there are lots of slightly different implementations"... Well yeah that's mildly annoying but it's still very useful! And then he completely throws away all credib…

> I always assumed there was more to Org mode than "Markdown for Emacs", but this post makes it sound exactly like that.

That is because the post focuses on org-mode: the markup language. But there is also org-mode: the agenda tracker, org-mode: the literate programming system, org-mode: the spreadsheet, org-mode: the website publishing system, org-mode: the document writing system, org-mode the time-tracking system, org-mode: the personal wiki, etc.

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

#114

Post by toolslive »

Groxx wrote: post #78
toolslive wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the same about Python. However, there the forces push in the opposite direction: Even when there are better pythony runtimes that provide almost identical behaviour (but better performance), everybody sticks to CPython.

I've seen tons of non-cpython use, so I'm not really sure what claim you're trying to make. Aside from supporting "having a spec allows for many implementations that all work".

Well, the original comment was implying org mode had limited popularity because there is no specification. I'm claiming cpython is way more popular compared to fe pypy because it has no spec. The typical scenario is: people try pypy. it mostly works but because of some weird problem some library is broken and then they give up.

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

#115

Post by noahjk »

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…

I'm surprised nobody else brought it up - what are the pros of left-hand driving? Is it about where the controls are in relation to handedness? Some sort of safety benefit? Better visibility in certain scenarios? And are postal carriers in America who drive LLVs getting the _best_ or the _worst_ of both worlds?

(I like to think about these sorts of things!)

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

#116

Post by adityaathalye »

getnormality wrote: post #95
adityaathalye wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps Org Mode reskinned to look more like Markdown. or , reskinned to look visually whatever one wants... https://sophiebos.io/posts/beautifying-emacs-org-mode/ https://zzamboni.org/post/beautifying-org-mode-in-emacs/ I mention this, because I am not particular about which character symbolises what as long as it is consistent and documented . However, some people do want things to look just so , and for them, fe…

Precisely. Emacs folks often talk about how incredibly powerful and flexible their system is, so working with a reskinned Org Mode markup system when dealing with other people's stuff should be completely trivial for them, right? They should consider accommodating less technically sophisticated people for whom different notations are a bigger burden, no?

Your wish is our command... I'd argue that Emacs package maintainers care a lot about usability, in general. This extends to when they craft a package for general use.

https://github.com/tvraman/emacspeak "the complete audio desktop" by our blind and sight-impaired friends, for our blind and sight-impaired friends (and others who must necessarily use speech interfaces)

https://github.com/pprevos/emacs-writing-studio for writers at large

fountain-mode for screenwriting and playwriting https://fountain-mode.org/

https://chrismaiorana.com/emacs-guides/org-mode-syntax/ ("for writers and thinkers")

markdown beautification

https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/10h9jf0/beautify_mar...

https://oxal.org/blog/powerful-emacs-hacks-image-markdown/

general beautification

https://github.com/pretty-mode/pretty-mode

etc. etc. etc.

If there is a specific kind of person's specific kind of text editing need, there's probably an Emacs package for that.

The real tragedy is how poorly Emacs itself is conveyed to people. Mouse-pointing etc. works just fine out of the box. And as the emacspeak package demonstrates, at its core, it is a very usable and humane piece of technology.

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

#117

Post by tconfrey »

I've been on this bandwagon for a long time! I proposed org as an interchange format for Productivity and PKM tools several years ago [0]. Org allows me to unify my bookmark manager with the rest of my PKM as well as to-do management in a way that I don't think is possible with markdown.

That said I think that AI is changing things as it becomes best practice to document and define everything in plain text for LLM consumption. Since the default text format is markdown (due to github and PKM tool support) more and more people are exposed to it as the one true markup language. So maybe the boat has sailed and org becomes another example of the better format that doesn't win out. OTOH LLMs slurp up org content just as easily as they do markdown, maybe more so given the richer syntax. So maybe there's still room for both?

Either way I think the losers are going to be Sharepoint, Confluence, Jira etc, maybe even wikis, ie all the non standard ways people have been documenting their work to date.

Like us org folks have been saying all along, just stick with plain text!

[0] https://braintool.org/2022/04/29/Tools4Thought-should-use-Or...

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

#118

Post by Groxx »

toolslive wrote: post #114
Groxx wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen tons of non-cpython use, so I'm not really sure what claim you're trying to make. Aside from supporting "having a spec allows for many implementations that all work".

Well, the original comment was implying org mode had limited popularity because there is no specification. I'm claiming cpython is way more popular compared to fe pypy because it has no spec. The typical scenario is: people try pypy. it mostly works but because of some weird problem some library is broken and then they give up.

Is the claim that pypy has no spec, but cpython does? By that definition I think either both have a spec (they both use https://docs.python.org/3/reference/index.html and both are just "an implementation") or neither has one (since neither fully specifies all behavior and all modules, which is probably true for ~all languages).

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

#119

Post by karmakaze »

noufalibrahim wrote: post #34
jasperry wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 .

Exactly. We should all speak/write Esperanto.

In the meantime, I'll advocate for evolving Markdown, specifically GFM.

I do use a custom keyboard layout, but that doesn't have to interoperate with anything/anyone.

Edit: I have a similar unpopular opinion: we should use functional languages and immutable datastructures. At least we some data of movement in that direction with the patterns being adopted by other languages and codebases.

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

#120

Post by adityaathalye »

dietr1ch wrote: post #98
getnormality wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precisely. Emacs folks often talk about how incredibly powerful and flexible their system is, so working with a reskinned Org Mode markup system when dealing with other people's stuff should be completely trivial for them, right? They should consider accommodating less technically sophisticated people for whom different notations are a bigger burden, no?

The problem isn't customising your editor to use the symbol you want, but to have a spec that allows freely sharing files back and forth without trouble. Org has no specification other editors can follow (although people have tried adding support to other editors and also writing such a spec).

There is a written-down specification, but not a formal grammar (I assume you implied the latter): https://orgmode.org/worg/org-syntax.html

The standalone project, org-parser is pretty good! https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser (usable from Javascript, Java).

See also: "Formal Specification and Programmatic Parser for Org-mode" https://www.reddit.com/r/emacs/comments/s0zvlh/formal_specif...

Post reply on HN