Hi, * TEC <tecos...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm still hoping for that discussion :P > > To the Org community, if you have thoughts on this - please share them > :)
For reasons explained in my Orgdown-related articles[1] I would propose to use this chance to introduce a different term for the Org-mode lightweight markup language in contrast to the Org-mode Elisp implementation in order to push the syntax in a tool-agnostic way. We should not think only of GNU Emacs because there is a rising number of tools that do support text files in Org-mode syntax[2] which is also a huge advantage for users of GNU Emacs: collaboration, public awareness of the syntax, more tool support, ... I proposed the term Orgdown for the Org-mode syntax and also proposed various levels in order to provide sub-sets of Org-mode syntax[3] that are realistic to implement with finite effort. Using those OD-levels to come up with a formal definition (EBNF?) might play perfectly well with different parameters of the MIME type[4]. In my opinion, this would be a huge step forward for the whole ecosystem that supports the same Org-mode syntax. If we do not keep the MIME type independent from the GNU Emacs Org-mode implementation, the overall use would be much smaller in the long run. Let's use that to establish a broad base for this great lightweight markup language syntax! [1] https://karl-voit.at/2021/11/27/orgdown/ https://emacsconf.org/2021/talks/org-outside/ https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown https://karl-voit.at/2021/12/02/Orgdown-feedback/ [2] https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Tool-Support.org [3] https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/blob/master/doc/Orgdown-Levels.org [4] https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown/-/issues/8 -- Personal Information Management > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/pim/ Emacs-related > http://Karl-Voit.at/tags/emacs/
