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

201–210 of 221 posts

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

#201

Post by KarlVoit »

rspoerri wrote: post #7

If org more was as successful as markdown it would likely also have a lot of unstandardized additions.

One of the arguments of the article is that there is a fundamental difference: Markdown was created as a small subset of syntax elements. Therefore, there was a high demand on syntax extensions that were added in a chaotic fashion.

Orgdown already comes with more syntax elements that Markdown probably will ever get. So I do see a clear argument for the case that "unstandardized additions" to orgdown are less likely in addition to the fact that there aren't any.

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

#202

Post by KarlVoit »

otikik wrote: post #160

It would get more adoption if it wasn’t tied to the waist to emacs. Markdown doesn’t require Vim.

Orgdown doesn't require Emacs either: https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/

https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool...

Tadaaaa!

Furthermore: Markdown requires a magic crystal ball to tell which Markdown flavor it actually is and how to process it for machines. Read the article.

Markdown would get more things done if it wasn't tied to the waist to chaos. ;-)

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

#203

Post by KarlVoit »

throw__away7391 wrote: post #2

We do not need another competing standard here. Markdown is adequate and more importantly widely adopted and growing.

You statement gives me the impression that you haven't read a single paragraph from the article you're commenting on.

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

#204

Post by KarlVoit »

binary132 wrote: post #18
throw__away7391 wrote: post #2

We do not need another competing standard here. Markdown is adequate and more importantly widely adopted and growing.

I don’t think anyone who gets really familiar with org can ever honestly say with a straight face that Markdown is adequate in comparison.

I did and I mentioned very particular reasons and arguments.

You posted an opinion. Now, I'm very curious how you came to your conclusion: was is adequate? How to you compare?

Did you read the article and got the reasons mentioned why MD can be problematic?

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

#205

Post by da_chicken »

adityaathalye wrote: post #196
da_chicken wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 s…

Okay. You didn't seem to understand that that was a rhetorical question, because you didn't seem to take the next step of reflection.

So, what does your comment to me say if used in response to your own org mode vs markdown comment you made in the post I responded to? You said org mode's capabilities are the reason why you don't want markdown.

You keep making this argument that org mode is just better, but you can immediately find a counterargument yourself to your own point.

Now, it's perfectly fine that that represents how you feel about the software. You can hold whatever opinion you want. But, you're not just trying to explain your opinion. You're trying to convince people that org mode is better. You understand why you're not being very persuasive in your argument, right? You've argued in a way that the only people who will agree with you are those that already hold the same opinion as you.

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

#206

Post by otikik »

KarlVoit wrote: post #202
otikik wrote: post #160

It would get more adoption if it wasn’t tied to the waist to emacs. Markdown doesn’t require Vim.

Orgdown doesn't require Emacs either: https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/ https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool... Tadaaaa! Furthermore: Markdown requires a magic crystal ball to tell which Markdown flavor it actually is and how to process it for machines. Read the article. Markdown would get more things done if it wasn't tied to the waist to chaos. ;-)

I’m not attacking your thing. I’m not contesting that people have written articles about emacs-less org mode in the past. But they have simply not caught on

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

#207

Post by KarlVoit »

otikik wrote: post #206
KarlVoit wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Orgdown doesn't require Emacs either: https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/ https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool... Tadaaaa! Furthermore: Markdown requires a magic crystal ball to tell which Markdown flavor it actually is and how to process it for machines. Read the article. Markdown would get more things done if it wasn't tied to the waist to chaos. ;-)

I’m not attacking your thing. I’m not contesting that people have written articles about emacs-less org mode in the past. But they have simply not caught on

My thing? ;-) My things are pretty much safe because I usually do risk analysis before I'm using new tools according to https://karl-voit.at/2021/01/18/tool-choices/

The purpose of the article is to make it a bit more transparent for people using Markdown-based tools that they still have some lock-in effects in place - depending how they are using one of the MD variants.

You're certainly right about the low level of popularity of orgdown. However, this was not the main purpose of the article and I made it very clear that there are many LMLs out there that do not come with the downsides of MD mentioned in the article. So even when you never ever touch org-mode or orgdown, this article is highly relevant to MD users. From that perspective, it's quite irrelevant if orgdown has caught on even though there are plenty of applications outside of Emacs that are able to use that syntax: https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool...

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

#208

Post by iLemming »

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…

> in a country where everyone drives on the right

What if I told you that your analogy breaks completely if you actually consider what Org-mode is. Think of Markdown as a noun (a thing) and Org-mode as a verb (a system that does things). It's like comparing HTML and React components - it's not about "preferable side of the road to drive", we're talking about a complete different mode of transportation - i.e., in a nation where there's infrastructure and roads for cyclists - the rules change from "drive on one side and obey traffic signs..." to be something different. Similar, yet different.

That's what everyone's missing when they try to compare Markdown and Org-mode, while looking at it only through the angle of the markup structure. Markdown is a markup - pure structure, no logic, no state, no content with behavior, no executable source blocks, no embedded logic - and that's the point.

Arguing which one should be "the default choice", is like saying - "just always drive a car, cars are more popular..." - an argument that has no sense whatsoever. If people find Org-mode useful (because it is), well, there's really not much you can do about it, right? Just like you can't tell people to prefer a bike, car, moto or a boat - each has pros and cons and suits different scenarios.

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

#209

Post by iLemming »

827a wrote: post #125

The only reason why Org mode doesn’t have twenty variants like Markdown is because no one uses it.

Sure - florists, influencers and soccer moms don't use Org-mode. Real hackers do, because it is extremely developer-oriented. And of course it won't ever be more popular, simply because there are far more soccer moms in the world and not too many hackers.

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

#210

Post by creata »

itmitica wrote: post #123
creata wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the markup of some pages, such as https://orgmode.org/Changes.html , at least parts of the website seem to have been generated from Org mode.

Yeah, but still not org mode.

Well, I'm not sure why that matters, but you can replace .html with .org in the URL and get the Org file.
Post reply on HN