Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes: > Eric Abrahamsen <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> writes: > >> Would this be eligible? > > Not that my .02€ are worth much, but I think the idea of inline notes is > good, but I don't think it should be done using links. See e.g. the > discussion on citation which introduced a [cite:⋯] command. A [comment:⋯] > command would also IMO make much more sense than [[comment:X][Y]] as was > allowed last time I read your patch (in the weekend, I think).
Wow, I just went back and looked at the cite thread. That was bewildering. I don't see a direct connection here, though -- cite was needed for very specific academic purposes, with very clearly-defined needs. Comment is much floppier: good for anything from notes-to-self, to notes-to-editor, to notes-to-no-one. *None* of the complexity is in the format itself: if you unloaded org-comment, the comment links would be perfectly human-readable. All of the complexity is in helper functions for manipulating them. I suppose it would be possible to define some non-link syntax for them, but why do that when the link syntax works perfectly well? > On inclusion in contrib I think you can put anything org-ish there. It's > better if the copyright is cleared in case we want to make it part of > core, but it's not necessary. There's little difference between core and > contrib as neither are included in Emacs and thus are hard to rely on. > > Since you use cl-lib (last I checked) it could not be part of Org before > 8.4. Ah, that's a good point. cl-lib isn't necessary, just convenient, and could be removed. Thanks, Eric
