Along these lines (and combining the s-exp suggestion from Max) , you can
achieve something like this with links.
This is lightly tested, and I am not thrilled with the eval for exporting,
but I couldn't get a macro to work on the export function to avoid it, and
this is just a proof of concept idea. This might only be suitable for
individual solutions, since you have to define this markup yourself.
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp :results silent
(defun italic (s)
(pcase backend ;; lexical
('latex (format "{\\textit{%s}}" s))
('html (format "<i>%s</i>" s))
(_ s)))
(defun @@-export (path desc backend)
(eval `(concat ,@(read path))))
(org-link-set-parameters
"@@"
:export #'@@-export)
#+END_SRC
In org, it would look like Here is a [[@@:((italic "part") "ial")]] markup.
And in exports this is what this implementation does.
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(org-export-string-as "Here is a [[@@:((italic \"part\") \"ial\")]]
markup." 'latex t)
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: Here is a {\textit{part}}ial markup.
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(org-export-string-as "Here is a [[@@:((italic \"part\") \"ial\")]]
markup." 'html t)
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: <p>
: Here is a <i>part</i>ial markup.</p>
#+BEGIN_SRC emacs-lisp
(org-export-string-as "Here is a [[@@:((italic \"part\") \"ial\")]]
markup." 'ascii t)
#+END_SRC
#+RESULTS:
: Here is a partial markup.
Of course, you are free to do what you want with the path, including parse
it yourself to generate the output, and since it is a link, you could do
all kinds of things to make it look the way you want with faces, overlays,
etc.
John
-----------------------------------
Professor John Kitchin (he/him/his)
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
@johnkitchin
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 12:54 PM Tom Gillespie <tgb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> After a bunch of rambling (see below if interested), I think I have
> a solution that should work for everyone. The key realization is that
> what we really want is the ability to have a "parse me separately"
> type of syntax. This meets the intra-word syntax needs and might
> meet some other needs as well.
>
> The solution is to make @@org:...@@ "parse me separately"
> block! It nearly works that way already too! To minimize typing
> we could have @@:...@@ the empty type default to org.
>
> This seems like a winner to me. The syntax for it already exists
> and won't conflict. It requires relatively minimal additional typing
> the implication is clear, and there are other places where such
> behavior could be useful.
>
> This syntax seems like a winner to me
> @@org:/hello/@@world
> @@:/hello/@@world
>
> You can also do things like
> #+begin_src org
> I want a number in this number@@org:src_elisp{(+ 1 2)}@@word!
> #+end_src
>
> Which would render to
> #+begin_src org
> I want a number in this number3word!
> #+end_src
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best!
> Tom
>
> --------------- rambling below -------------
>
>
> > This idea reminds me a bit of Scribble/Racket where every document is
> > just inverted code, which makes it possible to insert arbitrary Racket
> > code in your prose...
>
> I will say, despite some of my comments elsewhere, that I think
> exploring certain features of Scribble syntax for use in Org mode
> would simplify certain parts of the syntax immensely.
>
> For example
> various inline blocks are an absolute pain to parse because they
> allow nested delimiters /if they are matched/. The implementation
> of the /if they are matched/ clause is currently a nasty hack which
> generates a regular expression that can only actually handle nesting
> to depth 3. Actually implementing the recursive grammar add a lot
> of complexity to the syntax and is hard to get right.
>
> It would be vastly simpler to use Scribble's |<{hello }} world}>|
> style syntax and always terminate at the first matching delimiter.
> I'm sure that this would break some Org files, but it would make
> dealing with latex fragments and inline source blocks and inline
> footnotes SO much simpler. Matching an arbitrary number of
> angle brackets does add some complexity, but it is tiny compared
> to the complexity of enforcing matched parens and their failure cases
> especially because many of the places where nesting is required
> probably only see use of the nesting feature in a tiny fraction of
> all cases.
>
> One other reason why this is attractive is that all the instances
> where nested delimiters can appear on a line are preceded by
> some non-whitespace character. This means that using the
> pipe syntax does not conflict with table syntax!
>
> Now the question comes. If we could implement this for
> delimiters, could we also implement something similar
> for markup? The issue with the proposed markup outside
> delimiter inside approach is that it will change existing
> behavior for files that want the delimiters to be included
> in the markup, i.e. /{oops}/ becoming /oops/ is bad. A
> second issue is that putting the delimiter inside the markup
> cannot work for verbatim and code ={oops}= is ={oops}= no
> matter what. Therefore the solution is not uniform across all
> types of markup. We need another solution that works for
> all types of markup.
>
> What if we put the "start arbitrary markup" char outside
> the markup? Say something like |/ital/|icks? Or what if
> we went whole hog and used |{/ital/}|ics and made the
> |{...}| syntax trigger a generalized feature where the
> contents of the |{...}| block are parsed by themselves
> and can abutt any other text? This would be generally
> useful in a variety of situations beyond just intra-word
> markup.
>
> What are the issues with this approach? The first issue
> is that there is a conflict with table syntax if we were to
> use the pipe character because markup can appear at
> the start of a line. The second issue is that it might be
> confusing for users if |{}| also worked like {} when in the
> context of latex elements or inline src blocks, or maybe
> that is ok because |{}| never renders as text. Hrm. Ok.
> Second issue resolved, but what to do about the first?
>
> If we want generalized "parse this by itself" syntax so
> that we can write hello|{/world/}|ok, then we need a
> solution that can appear at the start of a line. So we
> can't use pipe because that is always a table line even
> if a zero width space is put before it ;). What other
> options do we have? How about #+|{/hello/}|world for
> the start of a line? As long as there is no trailing colon
> it isn't a keyword, so it could work ... except that if
> someone reflows the text and it is no longer a the
> start of a line then the syntax breaks. That is to say
> using #+| at the start of a line is not uniform, so we
> can't take that approach.
>
> What other chars to we have at our disposal? Hrm.
> How about @@? Could we use that? What happens
> if we use @@org:/hello/@@world? Or maybe if we
> want to minimize the number of chars we could do
> @@:/hello/@@world and have the empty prefix in
> @@ blocks mean org?
>
>
