Eric S Fraga <esfli...@gmail.com> writes:

> I use inlinetasks all the time and for a number of different use
> cases.  My initial reaction is that I would not like to see them
> disappear!

For once (!), this is not what I'm suggesting. :)

 I wonder if it is meant to stay an external module, like, e.g.,
"org-bibtex.el", or become automatically integrated in default Org,
like, e.g., "org-tables.el". Inline tasks are the odd ball, because they
are almost integrated -- e.g., full support in "ox.el" and
"org-element.el" -- but yet not autoloaded.

> I do agree that their implementation would appear to be a little
> clunky and maybe other solutions or implementations would be possible.

Besides, inline tasks are not required to look like headlines. For
example, diary S-exps do not look like headlines and yet appear in the

    %%(org-anniversary 1956  5 14) Arthur Dent is %d years old

I'm not even convinced they need to hold contents per se. If we imagine
that a new syntax would be "!!" at the beginning of a line, one line per
task, we can couple any task to the drawer for contents, e.g.;

    !! TODO Go to the grocery
    - carrots
    - bread

So, the drawer doesn't belong to the task, but still is adequately
placed to permit the association between the two.

> So, you have motivated me to look at alternatives just in case.  I've
> started playing with the export settings for drawers for odt and
> LaTeX.  It does seem like I can move to using drawers instead of inline
> tasks for all of my uses *except* for actual tasks.

I agree inline tasks can fill a role, but this role has to be clearly
defined so we can think about a proper syntax.

Again, something like the following is possible:

  !! TODO Go to the grocery :tag:
  SCHEDULED: <...> DEADLINE: <...>

One problem is that, unfortunately, the current syntax somewhat works,
whereas a new syntax would require more work to be effective (e.g.,
included in the agenda, in sparse trees...).

Anyway, I'm just thinking out loud.

> It would nice to have some improved navigation and search
> facilities for drawers which, knowing org, probably already exist?

I don't think anything like this exists. Drawers have two purposes: hide
stuff away, and allow selective export.

> It would also be useful to be able to narrow a view to the drawer
> contents.

This is `C-x n e' on a drawer boundary.


Nicolas Goaziou

Reply via email to