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

191–200 of 221 posts

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

#191

Post by internet_points »

leobg wrote: post #53
skeledrew wrote: post #17

I discovered and started using org-mode (and, as a result, Emacs) when I migrated from Evernote in '16. Today I use it for all my project, task and knowledge management needs, with some files going over 15MB in size. And I'm still loving it. Started out with headers only, and every time I wanted something more, it was always just there for the taking. Easy to use, and also crazy powerful. Can't think of anything else…

How do you handle PDFs, images, HTML/rich text snippets? Asking because Evernote supported all of those. It’s what keeps me using that app, even though I cringe every time I open it.

https://github.com/abo-abo/org-download is handy for images (org-mode shows images just fine).

https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/copy-as-org-mode/ lets you copy formatted text from web pages to org-mode format

pdf's – do you mean downloading them? I mean, emacs can view pdf's, your computer can store them as files, making a clickable link to ./sicp.pdf from org-mode is just [[./sicp.pdf]] (or, while you're reading the pdf or browsing it in dired, hit your key for org-store-link and then in org-mode hit the key for org-insert-link).

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

#192

Post by internet_points »

maximus-decimus wrote: post #145
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!

org-mode is just much more complicated to implement though and just contains so much. it's also a todo app. It also lets you run code like a python notebook. it can show you your tasks in a calendar. I've used "org-mode" todo apps on android, but people complain they can't really use it because it doesn't implement everything. The advantage of the core markdown syntax is that you know it works everywhere and it works…

I think the implementation challenge is the reasoning behind https://karl-voit.at/2021/11/27/orgdown/ So you can say "my org-mode parser implements orgdown level 1" meaning it has the basics. I think it sounds like a pretty good idea, though it's kind of a third party effort – it'd be better if there were some officially sanctioned compatibility level standard from the orgmode authors.

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

#193

Post by internet_points »

Groxx wrote: post #72
tasuki wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah. Well that sure shuts down the "you don't have to use Emacs" argument.

You have to read between the lines a bit, but the post supports it. It's talking about how readable it is, how you don't need tools, etc... and when it gets to tool support, it basically just has "you can use your mouse! you don't need to learn keyboard shortcuts!" to paraphrase, or if you prefer verbatim: > The basic file open/save, finding help, exiting Emacs stuff is accessible with icons or the menu. Or earlier:…

I don't use emacs in termux; I use organice (though considering switching to orgro). It supports all the features I need on mobile.

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

#194

Post by franga2000 »

The whole "markdown isn't standardised" point is just bullshit. Any place that supports markdown will support the basics and some places having extra features is a good thing! The only thing worse than not having a feature you need in some app is not having that feature in any app.

And the differences that exist between implementations are there for a reason. Do you think chat apps would let you have headings or footnotes or whatever if they used org mode syntax? No, they don't want to give you those formatting options, so if they used org mode instead of Markdown, they'd just rip it out of there too. And now you have the same problem.

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

#195

Post by lelanthran »

setopt wrote: post #188
lelanthran wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> org-mode is just much more complicated to implement though and just contains so much. So just implement the features it has in common with Markdown and add the rest as and when people ask for them. For me, org-mode syntax is just that much more intuitive than Markdown. I sometimes feel that when devs invent something (Markdown, YAML, etc), they really should do 5 minutes of research before inventing their thing. Ma…

Markdown was based on the "syntax" already being used informally in emails and on IRC. So the author did do some searching to define the syntax. I don’t like many parts of markdown either (like the syntax for bold), but those were also IIRC already being parsed by some IRC clients before Markdown was specified.

> Markdown was based on the "syntax" already being used informally in emails and on IRC.

News to me :-/

> So the author did do some searching to define the syntax.

I recall using tin/rtin in 1995, and people used the org mode syntax for italics, underline and bold (not that it made any difference). Same with plain-text email (I used elm, then pine, then mutt). Same with IRC clients - convention was the org mode syntax, not the markdown we have today.

The very first time I saw '**' for bold was in setext, circa 2004. People weren't actually using setext though; they were using *some text*, _some text_ and /some text/.

Here is a post from January 2001 documenting what the existing conventions were: https://everything2.com/title/conventions+for+plain+text

Here is the jargon file (maintained in the 90s by Guy Steele and ESR) that documented the the markup/typography conventions of the time: https://www.catb.org/jargon/html/writing-style.html

In short, no, I don't believe that the authors did any research. I think what happened is that they saw something like setext, though "great idea, lets run with that!", and did so.

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

#196

Post by adityaathalye »

da_chicken wrote: post #182
adityaathalye wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, more interoperability at the cost of capability. Also, yes, conversion is quirky. That is why Org works until it does, and then I trade off being stymied by markdown's more plain-ness, in favour of collaborating with others. And with vanilla markup, the trouble is that many applications /do not/ use just vanilla markup. People /invariably/ want "one key tweak" (like, front-matter or table of contents or footnote…

> Yes, more interoperability at the cost of capability. Well, then why aren't you using LaTeX? Isn't that more capable? > And with vanilla markup, the trouble is that many applications /do not/ use just vanilla markup. People /invariably/ want "one key tweak" And, that's going to be true as someone adopts it outside of Emacs, right? Surely, someone will decide that the way Org Mode is doing something is wrong, right?…

Sure... I use LaTeX when orgmode is insufficient. And I can use LaTeX from within orgmode too.

Utility is Contextual.

“When you are hungry, eat; when you are thirsty, drink; when you are tired, sleep.” - Wise UNIX Master Foo

----

http://catb.org/esr/writings/unix-koans/shell-tools.html

Master Foo and the Shell Tools

A Unix novice came to Master Foo and said: “I am confused. Is it not the Unix way that every program should concentrate on one thing and do it well?”

Master Foo nodded.

The novice continued: “Isn't it also the Unix way that the wheel should not be reinvented?”

Master Foo nodded again.

“Why, then, are there several tools with similar capabilities in text processing: sed, awk and Perl? With which one can I best practice the Unix way?”

Master Foo asked the novice: “If you have a text file, what tool would you use to produce a copy with a few words in it replaced by strings of your choosing?”

The novice frowned and said: “Perl's regexps would be excessive for so simple a task. I do not know awk, and I have been writing sed scripts in the last few weeks. As I have some experience with sed, at the moment I would prefer it. But if the job only needed to be done once rather than repeatedly, a text editor would suffice.”

Master Foo nodded and replied: “When you are hungry, eat; when you are thirsty, drink; when you are tired, sleep.”

Upon hearing this, the novice was enlightened.

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

#197

Post by KarlVoit »

Author of the article here:

It hurts me to read through the comments. One part of the people who commented obviously didn't read the article they're commenting on.

And another part of the commenters does mix up Org-mode, the Elisp implementation within Emacs, with orgdown, the lightweight syntax which is actually the topic of this article. This part of the discussion is totally missing the whole point of my article: practical issues related to Markdown; choosing any other LML which doesn't come with those downsides. Orgdown was just one example of many which I wanted to mention because it is one of the least known alternatives outside the Emacs bubble.

I extended the article accordingly and also answered to a comment that came via email.

HTH

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

#198

Post by KarlVoit »

tconfrey wrote: post #117

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 co…

I'm sorry. You're starting a totally different topic here.

I tried to emphasize in my article that this is about orgdown, the syntax of Org-mode which itself is an Elisp implementation of a flexible tool.

So whenever you refer to tools like Sharepoint, Confluence, Jira, ... you're discussing tools and not lightweight markup languages and where Markdown has downsides nobody seems to know of which was the goal of my article.

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

#199

Post by KarlVoit »

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 point of https://karl-voit.at/2025/08/17/Markdown-disaster/ and even more https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/ is that I do think that orgdown has very much a higher level of practical use (outside of Emacs) compared to Markdown.

And I do come from the daily practice with Markdown and not academic arguments alone - which I also fancy, I have to admit.

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

#200

Post by KarlVoit »

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 would ask you to read the article before writing a comment like that.

The whole point of the article is that there is no Markdown. At least not a single instance from it. So when you're referring to Markdown, you're actually referring to a few dozens of slightly different markup languages which are hard to identify and except for a few, very tedious to convert.

In my opinion, this is far from being "reasonable".

Orgdown is explicitly mentioned only as one LML that doesn't come with the listed downsides of Markdown. So if you think that my article tries to convince you to use orgdown instead, you've missed the part where I say that there are many good alternatives of Markdown that do perform better when it comes to real world processes. I just tried to use orgdown as one example among many to state my point by showing an alternative. If you think that orgdown is the only one, you did not read the article carefully enough.

YMMV

Post reply on HN