Hello, Jens Lechtenboerger <jens.lechtenboer...@fsfe.org> writes:
> currently, we have to write the following to continue an ordered > list from a value different from 1: > > 42. [@42] Answer > 43. Question? > > The requirement to type redundant information with the @-syntax > always struck me as odd. For my export backend org-re-reveal, I > recently received a request to export lists without @-syntax to > their “correct” start values [1]. > > Before working on my backend, I’d like to ask for feedback: Why was > the @-syntax introduced? Of what non-obvious effects should I be > aware? > > What do you think about the attached patch that allows to omit the > @-syntax? Controlled by the new variable > org-list-use-first-bullet-as-non-standard-counter, the code assigns > a counter value to the first list item from its bullet string if the > item > 1. does not specify a counter itself, > 2. has an alphanumeric bullet, and > 3. does not have a default start value (1, a, A). I think the current situation is better. It works, as advertised, and it allows you to re-number any item in the list, not necessarily the first one. Of course, it may be less "elegant", but the overhead is negligible, and, as a data point, I'd rather have continuation lists more visible than not, as it could create confusion in the document. I do not know about org-re-reveal, but included exporters do not display the [@xxx] part. However, they use its value to start lists at an appropriate number, if technically possible. I suggest org-re-reveal to do the same if that's not the case. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
