[O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi Dominik, hi everyone, Thank you for org-mode and thanks to all who contribute to this project. I am a newby to org-mode , I am an emacs user for LaTeX, mainly, and I would be happy to use more and more emacs, so org-mode seems very attractive. I imagine that writing a tutorial is a big work and I hope that I will not offend people who have taken this time. But I must say that the org-mode manual and the tutorials that I have tried to read are not enough progressive for beginners and do not take care of difference between interests of people. Example: I am presently mainly interested to see if it is possible to use gnus to write a scientific letter with all conveniences of texlive. Of course I can open a tex file with letter class and send to my colleague a pdf file. But it would be more convenient to write an email and using conversions to html and png images to send to him directly this email. I guess it is possilbe to do it with gnus. But the documentation is esoteric: I hear about links, but how it works concretly with example understanble by a newby ... mystery. It is therefore frustrating and quickly discouraging. So, in my opinion, a good tutorial is divided into precise tasks and speaks like that: You need to do that? So, follow me , from step to step, I will going to show you how I succeed to do what you want to do, and by imitation, you will also succeed ! A good tutorial avoids to suppose that the reader is already an expert. In a word, too much tutorial in org-mode lack of pedagogical efforts. Sorry to be speak so frankly, but I hope it will help. Waiting your help with gnus - latex and conversion in html , etc. etc. All the best Jo. 2013/9/28 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten
Re: [O] Transpose or open functions for table cells
Hi Suvayu On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:52 AM, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: | 2 | b | -- | 2 | b | | 3 | d | | 3 | | | 4 | e | | 4 | d | | 5 | | | 5 | e | If neither exists, any thoughts how might one go about writing one? Some time ago I wrote helper functions that do similar things for a row: http://orgmode.org/worg/org-hacks.html#column-sequence-in-row Now I added a suggestion for the same in a column: http://orgmode.org/worg/org-hacks.html#row-sequence-in-column I am also looking for something like org-open-line, but only for a table cell. Are you looking for something different than the above? Michael
Re: [O] A tutorial on using ox-rss.el to publish an Emacs-made blog
that's ok! This is my mailbox for my website. I will take care to add my true name each time I will send a reply. Regards, Basile 2013/9/27 Bastien b...@gnu.org Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 03:38:01PM +0200, Bastien wrote: Hi flammable (?), The post was signed Basile. :-p Yep, sorry Basile ! -- Bastien
Re: [O] Special characters in tables (iso-latin-1 or utf-8)
Michael Brand michael.ch.br...@gmail.com writes: A lisp formula is the easiest way to just copy fields: #+TBLFM: $2 = '(identity $1) Great tip, thanks! Jarmo
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
Hello Nicolas,
Nicolas Richard wrote:
Fabrice Niessen writes:
Due to a friend's request, I've tried to offer AUCTeX key bindings within Org
documents via a minor mode, called org-auctex-keys.
I checked that out because I often find myself doing C-c C-e while in
org-mode, but I expected it would insert
#+BEGIN_SRC latex
\begin{prompted_env}
\end{prompted_env}
#+END_SRC
instead of a new item.
Why not? It makes sense -- and the list item did not make such sense...
OTOH, I don't really want such a feature, because when I do this, I
usually realize that it's time for me to export the tree to LaTeX and go
on from there.
If you're interested, check it out at
https://github.com/fniessen/org-auctex-key-bindings.
I see no licence, which I think (though IANAL) is equal to a strict and
super restrictive copyright ; is that intended ?
No, it's just that I'm lost when it comes down to copyrights, copylefts, and
all the subtle meanings and implications of that.
Any advice on what to put? The purpose is, of course, that it can be freely
used, copied, etc.
Best regards,
Fabrice
--
Fabrice Niessen
Leuven, Belgium
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
Hello Marcin, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Due to a friend's request, I've tried to offer AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents via a minor mode, called org-auctex-keys. If you're interested, check it out at https://github.com/fniessen/org-auctex-key-bindings. Note that I'm willing to add extra AUCTeX keys -- but I don't use AUCTeX enough to know what's important to transfer to Org. Interesting idea - for me, especially C-c C-f bindings might be useful. What might be missing: C-c C-f C-e emphasize, might just be equivalent to C-c C-f C-i Already added. C-c C-j new item, might be equivalent to C-RET or something C-c C-c in AUCTeX, this just runs a TeX job. Here it initiate export or something like that. These will follow. Thanks for your input... Best regards, Fabrice -- Fabrice Niessen Leuven, Belgium
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 09:22:02 Joseph Vidal-Rosset joseph.vidal.ros...@gmail.com napisał(a): Hi Dominik, hi everyone, Thank you for org-mode and thanks to all who contribute to this project. I am a newby to org-mode , I am an emacs user for LaTeX, mainly, and I would be happy to use more and more emacs, so org-mode seems very attractive. I imagine that writing a tutorial is a big work and I hope that I will not offend people who have taken this time. But I must say that the org-mode manual and the tutorials that I have tried to read are not enough progressive for beginners and do not take care of difference between interests of people. Example: I am presently mainly interested to see if it is possible to use gnus to write a scientific letter with all conveniences of texlive. Of course I can open a tex file with letter class and send to my colleague a pdf file. But it would be more convenient to write an email and using conversions to html and png images to send to him directly this email. I guess it is possilbe to do it with gnus. But the documentation is esoteric: I hear about links, but how it works concretly with example understanble by a newby ... mystery. It is therefore frustrating and quickly discouraging. So, in my opinion, a good tutorial is divided into precise tasks and speaks like that: You need to do that? So, follow me , from step to step, I will going to show you how I succeed to do what you want to do, and by imitation, you will also succeed ! A good tutorial avoids to suppose that the reader is already an expert. In a word, too much tutorial in org-mode lack of pedagogical efforts. Sorry to be speak so frankly, but I hope it will help. Waiting your help with gnus - latex and conversion in html , etc. etc. All the best Jo. Well, from what I heard, Gnus is a bad example - it seems to be notoriously difficult to get into. OTOH, with Org-mode it is much better - I found even the manual *very* accessible, at least for a long-time Emacs user. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 08:11:23 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com napisał(a): Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? As I hinted in my previous email, there are two cases: 1. Emacs users who are new to Org-mode. This is basically covered by the manual. Period. 2. People new to Emacs who might want to use it /because/ of Org-mode. Here we have a huge potential for improvement, so to speak;). A couple of thoughts: - Screencasts and videos might be a viable option (even though it is a bit old, I consider your Google lecture a very good introduction to Org-mode - a survey of features; it is, however, aimed more at a power user than a newbie). - What might be really interesting would be something along the lines of C-h t. In fact, the Emacs tutorial itself badly needs an update imho. And a similar thing for Org-mode might be even better. In fact, though I am quite busy at the moment, I'd be happy to start thinking about something like this in my free time. What do you think? - For new users, there might be an installation instruction /including/ installing Emacs (especially on Windows machines, where it might be tricky). I think it should be emphasized that (at least in case of Org-mode) Emacs may be treated more as an application framework, which incidentally has more text-editing capabilities than, say, edit boxes of GTK etc. (just a bit more, you know;)), and that Org-mode is an application running in this particular environment. (Calling it an Elisp Virtual Machine might be a bit stretching, though;).) - Last but not least: we are still waiting for Sacha Chua to draw a sketchnote-based intro to Org-mode;). - Carsten Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
[O] Feature request: info-org-manual
Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: (defun info-org-manual () Display the Org-mode manual in Info mode. (interactive) (info org)) (the above code is a tiny change;), since it's more or less s/emacs/org/ on the original function). It might be bound to e.g. C-h o (at least in Org-mode), which seems to be free in stock Emacs. What do you think? -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 10:15:28AM +0200, Fabrice Niessen wrote: If you're interested, check it out at https://github.com/fniessen/org-auctex-key-bindings. I see no licence, which I think (though IANAL) is equal to a strict and super restrictive copyright ; is that intended ? No, it's just that I'm lost when it comes down to copyrights, copylefts, and all the subtle meanings and implications of that. Any advice on what to put? The purpose is, of course, that it can be freely used, copied, etc. I think Public Domain is the most open you can go. Otherwise GPL v2 is always good. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 11:56:05 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com napisał(a): On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 10:15:28AM +0200, Fabrice Niessen wrote: If you're interested, check it out at https://github.com/fniessen/org-auctex-key-bindings. I see no licence, which I think (though IANAL) is equal to a strict and super restrictive copyright ; is that intended ? No, it's just that I'm lost when it comes down to copyrights, copylefts, and all the subtle meanings and implications of that. Any advice on what to put? The purpose is, of course, that it can be freely used, copied, etc. I think Public Domain is the most open you can go. Otherwise GPL v2 is always good. Also, Creative Commons seem to be quite easy to understand (and most of them are a bit more restrictive than PD, or CC0). I'm not sure whether they can apply to software, though. Hth, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 28.9.2013, at 10:48, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 08:11:23 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com napisał(a): Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? As I hinted in my previous email, there are two cases: 1. Emacs users who are new to Org-mode. This is basically covered by the manual. Period. 2. People new to Emacs who might want to use it /because/ of Org-mode. Here we have a huge potential for improvement, so to speak;). A couple of thoughts: - Screencasts and videos might be a viable option (even though it is a bit old, I consider your Google lecture a very good introduction to Org-mode - a survey of features; it is, however, aimed more at a power user than a newbie). - What might be really interesting would be something along the lines of C-h t. In fact, the Emacs tutorial itself badly needs an update imho. And a similar thing for Org-mode might be even better. In fact, though I am quite busy at the moment, I'd be happy to start thinking about something like this in my free time. What do you think? - For new users, there might be an installation instruction /including/ installing Emacs (especially on Windows machines, where it might be tricky). I think it should be emphasized that (at least in case of Org-mode) Emacs may be treated more as an application framework, which incidentally has more text-editing capabilities than, say, edit boxes of GTK etc. (just a bit more, you know;)), and that Org-mode is an application running in this particular environment. (Calling it an Elisp Virtual Machine might be a bit stretching, though;).) - Last but not least: we are still waiting for Sacha Chua to draw a sketchnote-based intro to Org-mode;). Hi Marcin, thanks for your input! However, for now, O was not asking for new material to be produced (even though that may be interesting as well), but rather I wanted to make a selection of the large numbers of talks, screencasts, tutorials that introduce into Org more progressively. For example, my talk at Google is too long as the first thing a newbie should encounter. I was hoping we can identify maybe 5 different things (screencasts, tutorials, whatever) that we advertise at the top of the tutorial page as the recommended default introduction into Org. The rest of the tutorial page is then still there as additional reference for people who stay and want to dig deeper. The problem I have with the tutorial page right now is that there is a huge amount of tutorials, and no guidance for beginners. - Carsten signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
Hi Marcin, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. That said, if such a command is introduced, probably it should be org-info; keeping with the convention of all Org commands go under the org-* namespace (same as org-submit-bug-report). Cheers, -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
On 28.9.2013, at 12:10, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marcin, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. That said, if such a command is introduced, probably it should be org-info; That command does already exist. Also accessible from the Org menu, under Documentation. And indeed, we need to stay in org's namespace, I agree. - Carsten keeping with the convention of all Org commands go under the org-* namespace (same as org-submit-bug-report). Cheers, -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 12:16:52 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com napisał(a): On 28.9.2013, at 12:10, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marcin, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. That said, if such a command is introduced, probably it should be org-info; That command does already exist. Also accessible from the Org menu, under Documentation. And indeed, we need to stay in org's namespace, I agree. Sorry, then. It happened once again: I thought it would be nice if Org had such-and-such feature, and it already has it... It's kinda creepy;). (I'll probably bind it to some handy key in my init.el, though.) - Carsten Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
Am 28.09.2013 11:56, schrieb Suvayu Ali: I think Public Domain is the most open you can go. It isn't, simply because there is no way to put something into the public domain in many jurisdictions and what exactly is meant by public domain differs by jurisdiction as well. Otherwise GPL v2 is always good. CC0 probably comes closest to public domain for most intents and purposes, although I don't think it has been tested in court as the GPL variants have been. For Emacs, (L)GPL would be more appropriate and if integration into Emacs proper is desired, then you actually need to assign copyright to the FSF. Achim.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi Joseph, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 09:22:02AM +0200, Joseph Vidal-Rosset wrote: Example: I am presently mainly interested to see if it is possible to use gnus to write a scientific letter with all conveniences of texlive. Of course I can open a tex file with letter class and send to my colleague a pdf file. But it would be more convenient to write an email and using conversions to html and png images to send to him directly this email. I guess it is possilbe to do it with gnus. But the documentation is esoteric: I hear about links, but how it works concretly with example understanble by a newby ... mystery. It is therefore frustrating and quickly discouraging. Your example is not beginner's tutorial at all! Nor is it something that the manual can cover. For esoteric/specific needs like this advanced tutorials are more appropriate. Now to answer your question, I have seen people mention htmlize.el from contrib for something like this. To integrate with LaTeX, you should be able work out a solution with some dvipng magic. If memory serves me right, there was a post from Eric[1] mentioning how to use htmlize from gnus, and a thread on dvipng in the last month. Those might help you. As for Carsten's suggestion. I agree completely. It's a jungle of tutorials, I myself get confused on that page. I'll try to come-up with a shortlist of beginner tutorials in a few days. Cheers, Footnotes: [1] okay, found it: http://mid.gmane.org/87ppsba2tc@ucl.ac.uk -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:24:05PM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 12:16:52 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com napisał(a): On 28.9.2013, at 12:10, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marcin, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. That said, if such a command is introduced, probably it should be org-info; That command does already exist. Also accessible from the Org menu, under Documentation. And indeed, we need to stay in org's namespace, I agree. Sorry, then. It happened once again: I thought it would be nice if Org had such-and-such feature, and it already has it... It's kinda creepy;). (I'll probably bind it to some handy key in my init.el, though.) Yeah, happens all the time. I have been using Org since 2009 I think, and I didn't know! :) -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] AUCTeX key bindings within Org documents
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 12:30:01 Achim Gratz strom...@nexgo.de napisał(a): Am 28.09.2013 11:56, schrieb Suvayu Ali: I think Public Domain is the most open you can go. It isn't, simply because there is no way to put something into the public domain in many jurisdictions and what exactly is meant by public domain differs by jurisdiction as well. Otherwise GPL v2 is always good. CC0 probably comes closest to public domain for most intents and purposes, although I don't think it has been tested in court as the GPL variants have been. For Emacs, (L)GPL would be more appropriate and if integration into Emacs proper is desired, then you actually need to assign copyright to the FSF. BTW: what are exactly the legal consequences of assigning copyright to the FSF, especially (but not limited to) concerning copyright of future works? Is there any document on the web summarizing this? (I'm asking because there is at least one person around here who got very dissatisfied with his FSF copyright assignment, and I'd prefer to know what the pitfalls might be.) And for the record: you might consider the LPPL (LaTeX Project Public Licence), which is more liberal than GPL, but more restrictive than PD (and need not be restricted to LaTeX-related works). Achim. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 12:34:02 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com napisał(a): On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 12:24:05PM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 12:16:52 Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com napisał(a): On 28.9.2013, at 12:10, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Marcin, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: Hi, there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. That said, if such a command is introduced, probably it should be org-info; That command does already exist. Also accessible from the Org menu, under Documentation. And indeed, we need to stay in org's namespace, I agree. Sorry, then. It happened once again: I thought it would be nice if Org had such-and-such feature, and it already has it... It's kinda creepy;). (I'll probably bind it to some handy key in my init.el, though.) Yeah, happens all the time. I have been using Org since 2009 I think, and I didn't know! BTW: I have long ago disabled my Emacs menu (and toolbar - they take too much screen real estate, and are useless anyway;)), and - even though I've read the Org-mode manual (almost) cover to cover - I now also grepped it: this command is never mentioned there! So I guess that my lack of knowledge was justifiable. :) :) Cheers, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Feature request: info-org-manual
Hello, Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 11:53:30AM +0200, Marcin Borkowski wrote: there is the info-emacs-manual, bound to C-h r. Why not introduce info-org-manual, like this: I'll play the Devil's advocate, there are many emacs packages with info pages of their own. AFAIK, none of them do this. The only example I have in mind is Gnus, which has gnus-info-find-node bound to C-c TAB in *some* gnus buffers (e.g. group and summary buffers) -- Nicolas.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi, 2013/9/28 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com Your example is not beginner's tutorial at all! Nor is it something that the manual can cover. I do not understand why. Every beginner intested in org-mode is interested for such or such application, and that's a strange reply to make to a beginner like me to reply : sorry but your request is not a beginner's request. And if I am interested in org-mode mainly for the feature? For esoteric/specific needs like this advanced tutorials are more appropriate. I have not found a clear tutorial to help me on this point, and even in the org-mode manual, the relationship between org-mode and emacs email client like gnus is very difficult to understand. Again, I have not seen an easy example to follow. Now to answer your question, I have seen people mention htmlize.el from contrib for something like this. To integrate with LaTeX, you should be able work out a solution with some dvipng magic. If memory serves me right, there was a post from Eric[1] mentioning how to use htmlize from gnus, and a thread on dvipng in the last month. Those might help you. Thanks for this reference, I have tried these commands on a draft in my gnus, of course nothing work. I suspect that I need to configure gnus before... My point in this discussion was to pointing out that it is not only structure of tutorials can be a problem, but the content of explanations. Again, if no example is given for each task that one can realize with org-mode, only geeks expert in emacs will be able to read manuals for org-mode, and in my opinion it's too bad. Best wishes, Jo.
Re: [O] org mode R remote code evaluation
Michael Albinus michael.albi...@gmx.de writes: Eric Schulte schulte.e...@gmail.com writes: I'd rather not hard-code the value of /tmp/. Perhaps you could rework the patch so that it introduces a new customizable variable (including a documentation string) so that users can set the value for their system. Also, please package the patch with git format-patch. Patch is appended. Applied, Thanks for the patch! I've also added you to the list of contributors on worg, so I shouldn't ask you to complete the FSF paperwork again :). Cheers, Thanks, Best regards, Michael. -- Eric Schulte https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte PGP: 0x614CA05D
Re: [O] Fwd: epresent issue
I can't reproduce this problem with a recent version of epresent and Org-mode. For example with the following minimal Emacs invocation (without any configuration, run from the epresent directory). emacs -Q --eval (progn (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/lisp\) (require 'org)) -l epresent.el present.org I tried this (with my-path adjustments); and a just-downloaded epresent from above link; still the same behavior In more detail: 0. Run command emacs -Q --eval (progn (add-to-list 'load-path \~/pdsw/org-mode/lisp\) (require 'org)) -l ~/.emacs.d/downloads/epresent.el lastLect.org and then in emacs: 1. Start with epresent-run The buffer changes form half-way -- ie a. it becomes full-screen, b the menu line vanishes but c. the mode line is present d. the fonts are still small 2. After than whatever key I press (including q) it becomes like a presentation -- ie no mode-line and large fonts 3. One more q and it quits with the q appearing where point was last Also just checked with this trivial 4-line file in case there was something in my org file. Still the same -- * H1 ** H11 ** H12 * H2 --- I just wonder if its to do with 1. emacs version 23.4.1 Maybe the problem here could be the Emacs version, I'm using Emacs 24.3.1. A long while ago I remember having to hit t after launching a presentation to get the large fonts which sounds very similar to the issue you describe above. I don't suppose it's possible for you to switch to Emacs 24? 2. I am using xfce not the more common gnome/kde etc I'm using Xmonad which is probably less common even than xfce. I guess this difference could also be the cause of the weird behavior. Thinking of the second because there is a kind of lag in the full-screening of the window -- something which seems related to the window manager?? Sorry I don't have the motivation to test under other window managers. Hopefully an Emacs upgrade will help or there is some other workaround (e.g., pressing t after calling epresent-run). Best, -- Eric Schulte https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte PGP: 0x614CA05D
Re: [O] Exporting C++ code block to html
Xavier Garrido xavier.garr...@gmail.com writes: Dear Orgers, I face a problem when I want to 'html' export a pretty simple org file : test.org contains the following lines #+BEGIN_SRC c++ int j= 1; #+END_SRC If I do emacs --batch -q --eval '(require (quote org))' --visit test.org \ --funcall org-html-export-to-html I had to do the following to re-create this error. emacs --batch --eval (progn (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/lisp\) (require 'org) (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/contrib/lisp\)(require 'htmlize)) --visit /tmp/cpp-test.org --funcall org-html-export-to-html I get Loading vc-git... Loading cc-langs... Symbol's function definition is void: nil With the above I get the same I have also activated the debug mode but the messages are quite cryptic for me (attached file). The point is that it only crashes with C/C++ languages but works with python, awk, sh, emacs-lisp ... I'm using orgmode 8.2-35 from the git repository. I think this may be a bug in cc-mode when run in a batch Emacs session. My guess is that the `c-standard-font-lock-fontify-region-function' is never set. You could either try to set this value manually, or report this to the cc-mode maintainers, but I wouldn't be surprised if they ask why you want fontification in a batch session. Setting this variable manually from the command line with the following fixes this problem for me. emacs --batch --eval (progn (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/lisp\) (require 'org) (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/contrib/lisp\)(require 'htmlize) (setq c-standard-font-lock-fontify-region-function 'font-lock-default-fontify-region)) --visit /tmp/cpp-test.org --funcall org-html-export-to-html Cheers, Thanks for your help, Xavier oading vc-git... Loading cc-langs... Debugger entered--Lisp error: (void-function nil) nil(1 12 nil) c-font-lock-fontify-region(1 12 nil) font-lock-fontify-region(1 12 nil) byte-code(\212\303 \304\216\305ed #\210\306 \210\307\211+\207 [save-match-data-internal verbose font-lock-fontified match-data ((byte-code \30\302\\207 [save-match-data-internal set-match-data evaporate] 3)) font-lock-fontify-region font-lock-after-fontify-buffer t] 4) font-lock-default-fontify-buffer() font-lock-fontify-buffer() org-html-fontify-code(int j = 1;\n c++) org-html-do-format-code(int j = 1;\n c++ nil t nil) org-html-format-code((src-block (:language c++ :switches nil :parameters nil :begin 1 :end 39 :number-lines nil :preserve-indent nil :retain-labels t :use-labels t :label-fmt nil :hiddenp nil :value int j = 1;\n :post-blank 0 :post-affiliated 1 :parent (section (:begin 1 :end 39 :contents-begin 1 :contents-end 39 :post-blank 0 :parent (org-data nil #2)) #0))) (:export-options nil :input-file /home/garrido/Teachdir/C++.test/test.org :title test :html-extension html :html-link-org-as-html t :html-doctype xhtml-strict :html-container div :html-html5-fancy nil :html-link-use-abs-url nil :html-link-home :html-link-up :html-mathjax :html-postamble auto :html-preamble t :html-head :html-head-extra :html-head-include-default-style t :html-head-include-scripts t :html-table-attributes (:border 2 :cellspacing 0 :cellpadding 6 :rules groups :frame hsides) :html-table-row-tags (tr . /tr) :html-xml-declaration ((html . ?xml version=\1.0\ encoding=\%s\?) (php . ?php echo \?xml version=\\\1.0\\\ encoding=\\\%s\\\ ?\; ?)) :html-inline-images t :creator a href=\http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/\;Emacs/a 24.3.1 (a href=\http://orgmode.org\;Org/a mode 8.2) :with-latex t :author nil ...)) org-html-src-block((src-block (:language c++ :switches nil :parameters nil :begin 1 :end 39 :number-lines nil :preserve-indent nil :retain-labels t :use-labels t :label-fmt nil :hiddenp nil :value int j = 1;\n :post-blank 0 :post-affiliated 1 :parent (section (:begin 1 :end 39 :contents-begin 1 :contents-end 39 :post-blank 0 :parent (org-data nil #2)) #0))) nil (:export-options nil :input-file /home/garrido/Teachdir/C++.test/test.org :title test :html-extension html :html-link-org-as-html t :html-doctype xhtml-strict :html-container div :html-html5-fancy nil :html-link-use-abs-url nil :html-link-home :html-link-up :html-mathjax :html-postamble auto :html-preamble t :html-head :html-head-extra :html-head-include-default-style t :html-head-include-scripts t :html-table-attributes (:border 2 :cellspacing 0 :cellpadding 6 :rules groups :frame hsides) :html-table-row-tags (tr . /tr) :html-xml-declaration ((html . ?xml version=\1.0\ encoding=\%s\?) (php . ?php echo \?xml version=\\\1.0\\\ encoding=\\\%s\\\ ?\; ?)) :html-inline-images t :creator a href=\http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/\;Emacs/a 24.3.1 (a href=\http://orgmode.org\;Org/a mode 8.2) :with-latex t :author nil ...)) org-export-data((src-block (:language c++ :switches nil :parameters nil :begin 1 :end 39 :number-lines nil
Re: [O] [Babel] :colnames no no longer default for Emacs Lisp [Was] Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument listp hline)
I always wondered why emacs-lisp is the _only_ language with :colnames no as its default. Is there a reason therefore? If no really good reason, could we suppress that? This seemed to make sense early on because Emacs Lisp could easily process hlines itself, but at this point it adds more confusion than it is worth. I've reverted this default for elisp, hopefully it doesn't break too many peoples existing Org-mode files. Best, -- Eric Schulte https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte PGP: 0x614CA05D
Re: [O] [BABEL] BUG - error on tangling - disappears when changing the filename
Rainer M Krug rai...@krugs.de writes: OK - narrowed it down to a post tangle hook which I need for proper debugging of R (jumping to source line in org file and not tangled R file): , | #+begin_src emacs-lisp | (defvar org-babel-tangled-file nil | If non-nill, current file was tangled with org-babel-tangle) | (put 'org-babel-tangled-file 'safe-local-variable 'booleanp) | | (defun org-babel-mark-file-as-tangled () | (when (string-match [.]R (buffer-file-name)) | (add-file-local-variable 'org-babel-tangled-file t) | (add-file-local-variable 'buffer-read-only t) | (add-file-local-variable 'eval: '(auto-revert-mode)) | (basic-save-buffer))) | | (add-hook 'org-babel-post-tangle-hook 'org-babel-mark-file-as-tangled) | #+end_src ` The question is now why is this function org-babel-mark-file-as-tangled receives NULL as a buffer-file-name? I'm not sure, but perhaps you could wrap the body of buffer-file-name in a (when (buffer-file-name) ...) form to protect against null files. Hope this helps, I can't remove the when as I am also tangling some files which do not have any comment characters (DESCRIPTION file in R packages). Any suggestions welcome, Rainer Rainer M Krug rai...@krugs.de writes: Forgot: tried with 8.2 stable release and with version from git - both the same. Rainer M Krug rai...@krugs.de writes: Hi I have a strange error when tangling. I have a large org file with several code blocks tangling in about 20 R files and one bash file. Usually tangling works perfectly, but sometimes one code block does not tangle a code block to a file. These are different blocks. When I change the name of the fiole to be tangled to, it works again. After d=some time, I can rename it again and it works again. The last time it happened, I was debugging the function. But even when deleting all the content of the code block, the problem persists. This persists over restarts of org. The code block looks as follow: , | *** dispProb2D (./R/dispProd2D.R) | :PROPERTIES: | :tangle: ./R/dispProd2D.R | :comments: yes | :no-expand: TRUE | :END: | #+begin_src R | cat(5) | #+end_src ` In the original version, there is obviously code in it, but the error occurs even in the empty block. I just renamed the block, and it is working again. Any idea what is causing this? Please find the backtrace below. Cheers, Rainer , | ebugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument stringp nil) | set-buffer(nil) | (save-current-buffer (set-buffer (get-file-buffer file)) (revert-buffer t t t)) | org-babel-find-file-noselect-refresh(./R/dispProd2D.R) | (let* ((temp-path file) (visited-p (get-file-buffer temp-path)) | temp-result temp-file) (org-babel-find-file-noselect-refresh | temp-path) (setq temp-file (get-file-buffer temp-path)) | (save-current-buffer (set-buffer temp-file) (setq temp-result (progn | (run-hooks (quote org-babel-post-tangle-hook) (if visited-p nil | (kill-buffer temp-file)) temp-result) | (lambda (file) (let* ((temp-path file) (visited-p (get-file-buffer | temp-path)) temp-result temp-file) | (org-babel-find-file-noselect-refresh temp-path) (setq temp-file | (get-file-buffer temp-path)) (save-current-buffer (set-buffer | temp-file) (setq temp-result (progn (run-hooks (quote | org-babel-post-tangle-hook) (if visited-p nil (kill-buffer | temp-file)) temp-result))(./R/dispProd2D.R) | mapc((lambda (file) (let* ((temp-path file) (visited-p | (get-file-buffer temp-path)) temp-result temp-file) | (org-babel-find-file-noselect-refresh temp-path) (setq temp-file | (get-file-buffer temp-path)) (save-current-buffer (set-buffer | temp-file) (setq temp-result (progn (run-hooks (quote | org-babel-post-tangle-hook) (if visited-p nil (kill-buffer | temp-file)) temp-result)) (postTangleScript.sh ./.gitignore | ./DESCRIPTION ./.Rbuildignore ./R/parmsFire.R | ./R/parmsPinus.R ./R/parmsAcacia.R ./R/parmsRubus.R | ./R/parmsBudget.R ./R/parameter.R ./R/endYear.R | ./R/germEst.R ./R/seedDispersal.R ./R/seedProduction.R | ./R/fireAliens.R ./R/clearAliens.R ./R/prioritisation.R | ./R/beginYear.R ./R/main.R ./R/cumulativeDc.R | ./R/dcToIndLayer.R ./R/competition.R ./R/dispProd2D.R | ./R/initfun.R ./R/newInDrak.R ./R/resetOptions.R ./R/stats.R | ./R/layerIO.R ./R/layerNames.R ./R/onLoad.R ./NAMESPACE | ./R/package.R)) | (progn (mapc (function (lambda (file) (let* ((temp-path file) | (visited-p (get-file-buffer temp-path)) temp-result temp-file) | (org-babel-find-file-noselect-refresh temp-path) (setq temp-file | (get-file-buffer temp-path)) (save-current-buffer (set-buffer | temp-file) (setq temp-result (progn ...))) (if visited-p nil | (kill-buffer temp-file)) temp-result))) (mapcar (function car) | path-collector))) | (if org-babel-post-tangle-hook (progn (mapc (function (lambda | (file) (let* ((temp-path file) (visited-p ...) temp-result | temp-file)
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Joseph Vidal-Rosset joseph.vidal.ros...@gmail.com writes: Hi, 2013/9/28 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com Your example is not beginner's tutorial at all! Nor is it something that the manual can cover. I do not understand why. Every beginner intested in org-mode is interested for such or such application, and that's a strange reply to make to a beginner like me to reply : sorry but your request is not a beginner's request. And if I am interested in org-mode mainly for the feature? Org-mode is an application for the following (from the manual). Org is a mode for keeping notes, maintaining TODO lists, and doing project planning with a fast and effective plain-text system. Email is not mentioned in this description and is not core to what Org-mode does. I think the point made in the previous email is that your use case is neither basic nor typical Org-mode usage. I have not found a clear tutorial to help me on this point, and even in the org-mode manual, the relationship between org-mode and emacs email client like gnus is very difficult to understand. Again, I have not seen an easy example to follow. The feature (sending email with embedded equations compiled from latex) is provided by org-mime, which is a contributed package build on top of Org-mode. It is not mentioned in the Org-mode manual because it is *not* part of Org-mode, it is built on top of Org-mode. See [1] for a tutorial on using org-mime. Sometimes when using a tool like Org-mime which leverages other tools (e.g., message-mode and org-mode) it is necessary to learn all of the sub-tools at once which can result in a great deal of reading, there's no way to avoid this. Now to answer your question, I have seen people mention htmlize.el from contrib for something like this. To integrate with LaTeX, you should be able work out a solution with some dvipng magic. If memory serves me right, there was a post from Eric[1] mentioning how to use htmlize from gnus, and a thread on dvipng in the last month. Those might help you. Thanks for this reference, I have tried these commands on a draft in my gnus, of course nothing work. I suspect that I need to configure gnus before... I doubt this is related to your gnus configuration. Please try the tutorial linked below, and if you run into a problem then provide a complete reproducible recipe for what you've tried and how it failed and maybe we can help you to use these packages. My point in this discussion was to pointing out that it is not only structure of tutorials can be a problem, but the content of explanations. Again, if no example is given for each task that one can realize with org-mode, only geeks expert in emacs will be able to read manuals for org-mode, and in my opinion it's too bad. There is a need to balance between spending time spent documenting and spending time developing (fixing bugs and adding features etc...). More documentation and more examples in the documentation would be welcome, but given the time constraints of Org-mode developers and contributors not every desirable task can be accomplished. Cheers, Best wishes, Jo. Footnotes: [1] http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/org-mime.html -- Eric Schulte https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte PGP: 0x614CA05D
Re: [O] [Babel] Padlines
The blank line which was inserted between blocks isn't anymore for me. ECM: --8---cut here---start-8--- * Tangle these blocks :PROPERTIES: :tangle: yes :padline: yes :END: #+begin_src emacs-lisp :file test.csv data #+end_src #+begin_src emacs-lisp :file test.csv datb #+end_src --8---cut here---end---8--- results in: --8---cut here---start-8--- data datb --8---cut here---end---8--- Note that I tried adding :padline to yes, but I normally should not, as it is the default. Best regards, Seb Hi Seb, Thanks for this bug report, there was a problem in my previous patch in this thread. I've just pushed up a fix which should solve this problem. Best, -- Eric Schulte https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte PGP: 0x614CA05D
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
2013/9/28 Eric Schulte schulte.e...@gmail.com There is a need to balance between spending time spent documenting and spending time developing (fixing bugs and adding features etc...). More documentation and more examples in the documentation would be welcome, but given the time constraints of Org-mode developers and contributors not every desirable task can be accomplished. Thanks Eric for these explanations. Again my remark is not to be understood as an harsh critic. Just a remark on a gap existing in every educational task: sometimes teachers do not understand why students do not understand. What seems very easy to some people is obscure for others who need more time and more explanations. I am going to read your tutorial, and I thank you warmly for your help. Of course I will tell you if I succeed or if I do not. All the best Jo.
Re: [O] Exporting C++ code block to html
Am 27.09.2013 20:45, schrieb Xavier Garrido: emacs --batch -q --eval '(require (quote org))' --visit test.org \ --funcall org-html-export-to-html I get Loading vc-git... Loading cc-langs... Symbol's function definition is void: nil That's a bug in cc-mode (bug#14325) that has already been fixed in Emacs trunk. See the discussion on the bugtracker for workarounds. Achim.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi Carsten, On 9/28/2013 2:11 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote: Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. - I disagree. Your Google talk was just right - for me. It was my first exposure to Org Mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? About three years ago I stumbled across Org Mode when I was searching Emacs in general. (I already was familiar with Emacs, but only to fool around.) After viewing the Google talk, I specifically searched Org Mode. The three resources that made an impression: - the general tutorials, starting with David O'Toole's, - the Compact Guide with the Further Readings, (I did not look at the ones in the Org Manual) since this gave me a sense of how Org is and can be used, and - *the mailing list*, which was the one resource that has made the greatest impression on me from the beginning. It has been and is my best resource; it provides the greatest exposure to Org Mode both as to its uses and sense of the Org community. - Thank you Carsten, Bastien and all the rest if you for Org Mode. Charlie Millar
Re: [O] [PATCH] Display a count of items next to each list (or block)
Sebastien Vauban sva-news-D0wtAvR13HarG/idocf...@public.gmane.org writes: In order to make Org much nicer to use, I felt we missed a count of items next to the lists (or blocks, for multi-block agenda views). Here is a patch to add this, depending on the new variable `org-agenda-display-count-of-items' (enabled by default). The count of items must be updated when you apply tag filtering on lists. The patch does it as well. This patch doesn't report correct counts when a compact agenda is used and you filter by some task that doesn't match any entries in your block. The block is empty and shows no tasks but the counter is incorrect. --8---cut here---start-8--- ;; Compact the block agenda view (setq org-agenda-compact-blocks t) --8---cut here---end---8--- Filter by some tag not in these blocks / TAB PERSONAL RET --8---cut here---start-8--- Tasks to Refile (15/0) Stuck Projects (15/1) --8---cut here---end---8--- If the counts are correct I think this makes a good addition to org-mode. Regards, Bernt
Re: [O] Exporting C++ code block to html
Hi Eric, Setting this variable manually from the command line with the following fixes this problem for me. emacs --batch --eval (progn (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/lisp\) (require 'org) (add-to-list 'load-path \~/src/org-mode/contrib/lisp\)(require 'htmlize) (setq c-standard-font-lock-fontify-region-function 'font-lock-default-fontify-region)) --visit /tmp/cpp-test.org --funcall org-html-export-to-html This works for me. I will use it until emacs trunk will become official release. Many thanks to both of you, Cheers, Xavier --
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Hi Joseph, On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 01:59:28PM +0200, Joseph Vidal-Rosset wrote: Hi, 2013/9/28 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com Your example is not beginner's tutorial at all! Nor is it something that the manual can cover. I do not understand why. Every beginner intested in org-mode is interested for such or such application, and that's a strange reply to make to a beginner like me to reply : sorry but your request is not a beginner's request. And if I am interested in org-mode mainly for the feature? I'm sorry my response came off that way. All that I wanted to say was: you are trying to leverage Org into doing something that it was not designed to do. That is not a bad thing at all. The community always welcomes such creative efforts and always makes an effort to document it (usually on Worg). Partly, this is also the reason why navigating through the information available on Worg can be daunting. I believe Eric echoed the same sentiment in another message. For esoteric/specific needs like this advanced tutorials are more appropriate. I have not found a clear tutorial to help me on this point, and even in the org-mode manual, the relationship between org-mode and emacs email client like gnus is very difficult to understand. Again, I have not seen an easy example to follow. This actually proves my point. Tutorials are written by volunteers like you and me. If there is no tutorial, it means no one has encoutered the problem or encoutered and solved it (at least did not put effort into documenting it). In such a case please feel free to ask on the mailing list. Tell us what you want to achieve, what you have tried, and someone with a bright idea will chime in. I'm sure you have noticed it by now, the Org community is one of the most welcoming and friendly out there. Good luck following up on Eric's suggestions with regards to your particular request. If you do get it working, I would encourage you to document it on Worg or the mailing list. Cheers, -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 28.9.2013, at 16:26, Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net wrote: Hi Carsten, On 9/28/2013 2:11 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote: Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. - I disagree. Your Google talk was just right - for me. It was my first exposure to Org Mode. Well, I am glad to hear that it still does its work. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? About three years ago I stumbled across Org Mode when I was searching Emacs in general. (I already was familiar with Emacs, but only to fool around.) After viewing the Google talk, I specifically searched Org Mode. The three resources that made an impression: - the general tutorials, starting with David O'Toole's, - the Compact Guide with the Further Readings, (I did not look at the ones in the Org Manual) since this gave me a sense of how Org is and can be used, and - the mailing list, which was the one resource that has made the greatest impression on me from the beginning. It has been and is my best resource; it provides the greatest exposure to Org Mode both as to its uses and sense of the Org community. Thank you for your input to this discussion. - Carsten - Thank you Carsten, Bastien and all the rest if you for Org Mode. Charlie Millar signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 28/09/13 07:11, Carsten Dominik wrote: Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten I think we need to try and identify why most new users come to org-mode. This might give a better idea of how to re-organize things. I am guessing that initially many users are attracted by the task management and outlining features. From these basic features flow things such as publishing, clocking, Babel. So maybe listing Tutorials in this order would be a start. Personally if I am learning something new I want a broad overview of the main features, with links to places where I can find more detail. For example David O'Toole's and Sacha's tutorials cover this very well. The videos are an excellent resource, but require the user to set aside 30-60mins in one block of time. People are more likely to watch them if their initial interest has been piqued by something they can read and digest in small blocks. Ian.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
2013/9/28 Suvayu Ali fatkasuvayu+li...@gmail.com I'm sure you have noticed it by now, the Org community is one of the most welcoming and friendly out there. Indeed it is ! Good luck following up on Eric's suggestions with regards to your particular request. If you do get it working, I would encourage you to document it on Worg or the mailing list. Many thanks for your email. I am going to read and to apply Eric documentation. I wlll tell you the result and I hope that it will be useful too. All the best Jo.
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 18:14:11 Ian Barton li...@wilkesley.net napisał(a): On 28/09/13 07:11, Carsten Dominik wrote: Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten I think we need to try and identify why most new users come to org-mode. This might give a better idea of how to re-organize things. I am guessing that initially many users are attracted by the task management and outlining features. From these basic features flow things such as publishing, clocking, Babel. So maybe listing Tutorials in this order would be a start. Personally if I am learning something new I want a broad overview of the main features, with links to places where I can find more detail. For example David O'Toole's and Sacha's tutorials cover this very well. The videos are an excellent resource, but require the user to set aside 30-60mins in one block of time. People are more likely to watch them if their initial interest has been piqued by something they can read and digest in small blocks. Hear, hear. What I would love to see is a 4-5 minutes video trailer, showing most prominent features of Org-mode, with cool music, effects etc. - like movie trailers. :) Ian. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 28.9.2013, at 19:43, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 18:14:11 Ian Barton li...@wilkesley.net napisał(a): On 28/09/13 07:11, Carsten Dominik wrote: Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten I think we need to try and identify why most new users come to org-mode. This might give a better idea of how to re-organize things. I am guessing that initially many users are attracted by the task management and outlining features. From these basic features flow things such as publishing, clocking, Babel. So maybe listing Tutorials in this order would be a start. Personally if I am learning something new I want a broad overview of the main features, with links to places where I can find more detail. For example David O'Toole's and Sacha's tutorials cover this very well. The videos are an excellent resource, but require the user to set aside 30-60mins in one block of time. People are more likely to watch them if their initial interest has been piqued by something they can read and digest in small blocks. Hear, hear. What I would love to see is a 4-5 minutes video trailer, showing most prominent features of Org-mode, with cool music, effects etc. - like movie trailers. :) Yes, I'd love that too. High quality, show effects but don't explain key bindings. :) - Carsten Ian. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
carsten.domi...@gmail.com writes: Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? Dear Carsten, For me it was one resource: the compact guide. I found it well written, with links to additional info if I needed it, and structured in such a way that I could really start using immediately what I was most interested in at the moment (initially outlines and scheduling). [Some context: I came to org looking for the outlines and scheduling, and a vague desire for literate programming, because I wanted these features fully within Emacs, after having played with Leo ---http://leoeditor.com/--- for around a year]. To see what I might feel today, I just went to the first hit I get in google for org mode (which is, of course, http://orgmode.org/) and still find the compact guide. But maybe it would be good to emphasize it a bit more (there are ten lines of text, and the compact guide is the fifth). As well, a link to the compact guide might be added from the org-tutorial page. Finally, regarding the org-tutorial page, as it has already been mentioned in this thread, videos might not be the best vehicle for everyone (certainly not for me ---I'd rather read text where I can adjust the pace to that of my brain). Sacha's Outlining your notes with org made a lasting impression, though (but Sacha's blog entry was written after I read the compact guide, IIRC). Best (and thanks for org), R. - Carsten -- Ramon Diaz-Uriarte Department of Biochemistry, Lab B-25 Facultad de Medicina Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Arzobispo Morcillo, 4 28029 Madrid Spain Phone: +34-91-497-2412 Email: rdia...@gmail.com ramon.d...@iib.uam.es http://ligarto.org/rdiaz
[O] Restore raw output in LaTeX export from in-line code block
I noticed that raw results from in-line code blocks were disappearing in
the new LaTeX exporter, and bisected the repo to the change 7117ad4f92. I
have created the attached patch to fix the problem and restore the previous
behavior.
example file
* Test
1. Inline common lisp raw: src_lisp[:results raw]{(+ 2 2)}, should
say 4.
Desired output, restored by patch
\item Inline common lisp raw: 4, should say 4.
Output without patch
\item Inline common lisp raw: , should say 4.
If this looks right, please apply.
Liam
0001-Restore-raw-output-in-LaTeX-export-from-in-line-code.patch
Description: Binary data
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Aloha Carsten, Carsten Dominik carsten.domi...@gmail.com writes: Hi everyone, today I looked at our tutorial page at http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/index.html and came away with the feeling that that this page has become somewhat useless for people who are really new to Org. I think the page should start with a section of true recommendations for beginners, a path we tell every new users to take in order to learn about Org mode. Can we have a discussion here on how this path should look like? When you came to Org-mode as a newby, what were the three resources that really made an impression on by being accessible and providing feel and promise for digging deeper? - Carsten Good idea! Here is my $0.02. First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Its original focus on project planning has expanded with two amazing and fundamental contributions, Eric and Dan's mature Babel implementation and Nicolas' new export framework. These core values are manifest most clearly in the Org-mode community and its organ, the mailing list. There isn't a tutorial on how to use the mailing list! I'm confident that others in the Org-mode community admire Nick Dokos' contributions to the list as much as I do. It would be great to have his perspective and approach in a short, welcoming tutorial. For me, the philosophy behind Org-mode shows most clearly in your talk at the Max-Planck Institute. I think this video is a must-see. On the project planning side, I think a good starting place is David O'Toole's popular tutorial. It is an efficient presentation and efficiency is one thing I think we all like about Org-mode. For me, the next step was to learn something about how to plan. I thought I knew how to do this, of course, but I really had no clue and consequently I couldn't make heads or tails of what initially struck me as a complex, ungainly set of inscrutable functions. I bought and read David Allen's little book, then followed Charles Cave's tutorial--it started to make sense! Armed with this new understanding, I found Bernt Hansen's Organize Your Life in Plain Text to be a huge repository of practical and useful advice (even though I have no desire to clock my unruly habits). On the research side, John Kitchin's Sci-Py talk seems to me a very good introduction. I'd follow this up with our paper in Journal of Statistical Software, which is now widely distributed. After that, I'd jump straight to John's supporting document for his paper with Alexander Hallenbeck. When this pdf document is opened in Adobe Reader (not Skim) it has links that look like push-pins. The first one of these is the Org-mode file that created the pdf document and when I double-click on it I find the Org source for his document in my Emacs. This is a terrific example of what an Org-mode file used for reproducible research should look like, very clean and disarmingly simple, a real gem. I strongly believe the Emacs newbie needs to steer clear of the temptation to lard .emacs with every tasty tidbit out there. In my experience, this is a BAD IDEA, but nearly everyone just casually says, put this in your init file. A tutorial that gives very practical advice (some of which will undoubtedly offend or infuriate hard-core Emacs users) would be a real blessing. Finally, many of the tutorials are outdated. A good example is the one I wrote on the old LaTeX exporter. This one is clearly marked now, but it would be very good to corral the older tutorials in their own space, away from where the real tutorial action happens. Apologies for rambling. hth, Tom -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. Its original focus on project planning has expanded with two amazing and fundamental contributions, Eric and Dan's mature Babel implementation and Nicolas' new export framework. I use the LaTeX export to create pdf documents, such as contracts and pleadings, nothing scientific there. Sometimes I will export to utf-8 text file, so I can copy and paste into those other document formats. (Sorry to say, but most of the US legal community is still MS Word and WordPerfect oriented.) I believe that I can eventually use Org-Babel for reproducible research, research being more other than scientific. These core values are manifest most clearly in the Org-mode community and its organ, the mailing list. There isn't a tutorial on how to use the mailing list! I'm confident that others in the Org-mode community admire Nick Dokos' contributions to the list as much as I do. It would be great to have his perspective and approach in a short, welcoming tutorial. No argument about the mailing list - see my earlier post. Also, Nick has helped me a few times; and I might add, I make sure that I read your posts - this is not to curry favor! hth, Tom Charlie Millar
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 16:50:09 Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net napisał(a): On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. +1. Although I'm also a scientist (mathematics), I used Org-mode /once/ for science, and it turned out that I felt very much constrained and quickly got back to LaTeX, where I felt much more comfortable. Its original focus on project planning has expanded with two amazing and fundamental contributions, Eric and Dan's mature Babel implementation and Nicolas' new export framework. I use the LaTeX export to create pdf documents, such as contracts and pleadings, nothing scientific there. Sometimes I will export to utf-8 text file, so I can copy and paste into those other document formats. (Sorry to say, but most of the US legal community is still MS Word and WordPerfect oriented.) I believe that I can eventually use Org-Babel for reproducible research, research being more other than scientific. For me, Org-mode is /mainly/ a planner, outliner, scheduler, clocking device and a tool to write blog posts. I use Org spreadsheets just a little bit. As I mentioned, I work heavily with LaTeX (and beamer), but do not use Org-mode for that (maybe apart from the initial stage) -- I am comfortable with LaTeX (using AUCTeX, of course), so Org-mode export does nothing for me. This seems to confirm that Org is quite flexible and can be adapted to a variety of workflows. Best, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 16:50:09 Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net napisał(a): On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. +1. Although I'm also a scientist (mathematics), I used Org-mode /once/ for science, and it turned out that I felt very much constrained and quickly got back to LaTeX, where I felt much more comfortable. http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University This is starting to remind me of bike-shedding. Org-mode is a toolbox providing various things that can work toward whatever end one wants. It's agnostic to field. It doesn't really matter what the end uses are -- Org-mode is what functions it provides. How those are combined by others in various fields, lines of work, or so on are simply illustrations of it's capabilities with respect to neat ways of combining various aspects of what Org is. Thus, I wouldn't try to pitch these things one way or another (Org is great for paralegals or Org is the answer for those doing re-producible research); I'd simply list what it does as what is is and what it can be used for as a way to entice new users and help get into the top results of some google searches for tools/solutions/etc.. It seems we all get what it really is, (TODOs/agenda, universal markdown - export to tons of formats, allowing mixing of prose/code/results, and so on), but are sort of trying to lay claim to why these tools make it best suited toward some particular field. Whether you use one of Org's features or all of them, it is what it is and this can be highlighted in a neat manner and made appealing to those looking for help in these relevant areas of life. John
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On 9/28/2013 5:52 PM, John Hendy wrote: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 16:50:09 Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net napisał(a): On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. +1. Although I'm also a scientist (mathematics), I used Org-mode /once/ for science, and it turned out that I felt very much constrained and quickly got back to LaTeX, where I felt much more comfortable. http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University This is starting to remind me of bike-shedding. Org-mode is a toolbox providing various things that can work toward whatever end one wants. It's agnostic to field. It doesn't really matter what the end uses are -- Org-mode is what functions it provides. How those are combined by others in various fields, lines of work, or so on are simply illustrations of it's capabilities with respect to neat ways of combining various aspects of what Org is. Thus, I wouldn't try to pitch these things one way or another (Org is great for paralegals or Org is the answer for those doing re-producible research); I'd simply list what it does as what is is and what it can be used for as a way to entice new users and help get into the top results of some google searches for tools/solutions/etc.. It seems we all get what it really is, (TODOs/agenda, universal markdown - export to tons of formats, allowing mixing of prose/code/results, and so on), but are sort of trying to lay claim to why these tools make it best suited toward some particular field. Whether you use one of Org's features or all of them, it is what it is and this can be highlighted in a neat manner and made appealing to those looking for help in these relevant areas of life. John You said it better than I. Charlie
[O] SCHEDULED property behavior not compatible with habits? Confused: How to make this work? #orgmode
Hello, having tried out the habits module after studying the manual on TODOs and scheduling, I cannot make habits work. Reason: When I set the :SCHEDULED: property of a node with a repetition interval such as: 2013-09-27 Fri .+1d, then changing the TODO status from TODO to DONE will 1. change the status back to TODO (so that the item stays scheduled for a next time) 2. change the date of SCHEDULED to one day after the date of completion of the task This is consistent with the description in the manual at 8.3.2 Repeated tasks, and makes sense. However, it interferes with habits, because it changes the date from which the tracking of the habit repetition of the task is being tracked. This means that this node disappears from the habit display in the agenda. Also, it undoes the configured logging mechanism (for example, note+timestamp for DONE state. Am I overseeing something? Surely it must be my mistake. I saw habits at work in the chat of Sacha Chua with Bastien Guerry ( http://sachachua.com/blog/2013/07/emacs-chat-sacha-chua-with-bastien-guerry/) and was quite impressed. But I could not repeat the same results as I saw on Sacha's screen. Cheers, Iannis Zannos
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
Aloha John, Marcin, and Charles, Yes, I completely agree with you. Apologies if my remarks were taken to be exclusionary in any way. They weren't intended to be. The diversity of the Org-mode community is one of its great strengths. My comments were intended to be ideas on how we might introduce Org-mode to a wider audience. In this vein, I think it would be useful to have a brief statement about Org-mode that gives the interested reader from any background a good feel for the scope of Org-mode and how it presents itself to the user. I don't think the current statements about what Org-mode is do this very effectively, though they might have done so in the past. The research programming interface is meant to encompass situations where all of the software's major components are put to use and thus to indicate the software's scope. The bit about scientists likely needs some qualifications to be absolutely true, but it also prepares the reader for an interface of a particular kind, one that is logical and complex rather than intuitive. The core values bit for me helps distinguish the Org-mode community from innumerable others we all deal with every day. There are probably better ways to give the novice a sense of the Org-mode experience, but these are the things that stand out for me. All the best, Tom John Hendy jw.he...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 16:50:09 Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net napisał(a): On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. +1. Although I'm also a scientist (mathematics), I used Org-mode /once/ for science, and it turned out that I felt very much constrained and quickly got back to LaTeX, where I felt much more comfortable. http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University This is starting to remind me of bike-shedding. Org-mode is a toolbox providing various things that can work toward whatever end one wants. It's agnostic to field. It doesn't really matter what the end uses are -- Org-mode is what functions it provides. How those are combined by others in various fields, lines of work, or so on are simply illustrations of it's capabilities with respect to neat ways of combining various aspects of what Org is. Thus, I wouldn't try to pitch these things one way or another (Org is great for paralegals or Org is the answer for those doing re-producible research); I'd simply list what it does as what is is and what it can be used for as a way to entice new users and help get into the top results of some google searches for tools/solutions/etc.. It seems we all get what it really is, (TODOs/agenda, universal markdown - export to tons of formats, allowing mixing of prose/code/results, and so on), but are sort of trying to lay claim to why these tools make it best suited toward some particular field. Whether you use one of Org's features or all of them, it is what it is and this can be highlighted in a neat manner and made appealing to those looking for help in these relevant areas of life. John -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
Re: [O] SCHEDULED property behavior not compatible with habits? Confused: How to make this work? #orgmode
Dnia 2013-09-29, o godz. 02:21:55 Iannis Zannos zan...@gmail.com napisał(a): Hello, having tried out the habits module after studying the manual on TODOs and scheduling, I cannot make habits work. Reason: When I set the :SCHEDULED: property of a node with a repetition interval such as: 2013-09-27 Fri .+1d, then changing the TODO status from TODO to DONE will 1. change the status back to TODO (so that the item stays scheduled for a next time) 2. change the date of SCHEDULED to one day after the date of completion of the task This is consistent with the description in the manual at 8.3.2 Repeated tasks, and makes sense. However, it interferes with habits, because it changes the date from which the tracking of the habit repetition of the task is being tracked. This means that this node disappears from the habit display in the agenda. Also, it undoes the configured logging mechanism (for example, note+timestamp for DONE state. Am I overseeing something? Surely it must be my mistake. I saw habits at work in the chat of Sacha Chua with Bastien Guerry ( http://sachachua.com/blog/2013/07/emacs-chat-sacha-chua-with-bastien-guerry/) and was quite impressed. But I could not repeat the same results as I saw on Sacha's screen. Cheers, Iannis Zannos Tip 1: try setting org-habit-show-habits-only-for-today to nil (or waiting until tomorrow;)). Tip 2: it seems you mustn't track changes /into/ a TODO state, only into DONE. See note at the bottom here: http://mbork.pl/2013-09-23_Automatic_insertion_of_habit_templates_%28en%29 Hth, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
[O] org pomodoro
I've put up some code on github that I use for tracking time using the Pomodoro method. Perhaps others might find it useful. https://github.com/dwhoman/org-pomodoro
Re: [O] SCHEDULED property behavior not compatible with habits? Confused: How to make this work? #orgmode
Hello Marcin Thanks, for the answer. (setq org-habit-show-habits-only-for-today nil) did the trick. Perhaps this should go into the manual ... Best, Iannis Z. On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.plwrote: Dnia 2013-09-29, o godz. 02:21:55 Iannis Zannos zan...@gmail.com napisał(a): Hello, having tried out the habits module after studying the manual on TODOs and scheduling, I cannot make habits work. Reason: When I set the :SCHEDULED: property of a node with a repetition interval such as: 2013-09-27 Fri .+1d, then changing the TODO status from TODO to DONE will 1. change the status back to TODO (so that the item stays scheduled for a next time) 2. change the date of SCHEDULED to one day after the date of completion of the task This is consistent with the description in the manual at 8.3.2 Repeated tasks, and makes sense. However, it interferes with habits, because it changes the date from which the tracking of the habit repetition of the task is being tracked. This means that this node disappears from the habit display in the agenda. Also, it undoes the configured logging mechanism (for example, note+timestamp for DONE state. Am I overseeing something? Surely it must be my mistake. I saw habits at work in the chat of Sacha Chua with Bastien Guerry ( http://sachachua.com/blog/2013/07/emacs-chat-sacha-chua-with-bastien-guerry/ ) and was quite impressed. But I could not repeat the same results as I saw on Sacha's screen. Cheers, Iannis Zannos Tip 1: try setting org-habit-show-habits-only-for-today to nil (or waiting until tomorrow;)). Tip 2: it seems you mustn't track changes /into/ a TODO state, only into DONE. See note at the bottom here: http://mbork.pl/2013-09-23_Automatic_insertion_of_habit_templates_%28en%29 Hth, -- Marcin Borkowski http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University
Re: [O] Org Tutorials need more structure
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Thomas S. Dye t...@tsdye.com wrote: Aloha John, Marcin, and Charles, Yes, I completely agree with you. Apologies if my remarks were taken to be exclusionary in any way. They weren't intended to be. The diversity of the Org-mode community is one of its great strengths. I don't take them as exclusionary, just didn't want to see folks going down a rabbit hole that diverges from the original intent :) My comments were intended to be ideas on how we might introduce Org-mode to a wider audience. In this vein, I think it would be useful to have a brief statement about Org-mode that gives the interested reader from any background a good feel for the scope of Org-mode and how it presents itself to the user. I don't think the current statements about what Org-mode is do this very effectively, though they might have done so in the past. Absolutely love that, and this puts some of your earlier comments in perspective -- you're looking for the 30sec elevator pitch for Org-mode, and saying this outline-y task manager is not cutting it. John The research programming interface is meant to encompass situations where all of the software's major components are put to use and thus to indicate the software's scope. The bit about scientists likely needs some qualifications to be absolutely true, but it also prepares the reader for an interface of a particular kind, one that is logical and complex rather than intuitive. The core values bit for me helps distinguish the Org-mode community from innumerable others we all deal with every day. There are probably better ways to give the novice a sense of the Org-mode experience, but these are the things that stand out for me. All the best, Tom John Hendy jw.he...@gmail.com writes: On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Marcin Borkowski mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl wrote: Dnia 2013-09-28, o godz. 16:50:09 Charles Millar mill...@verizon.net napisał(a): On 9/28/2013 3:52 PM, Thomas S. Dye wrote: Aloha Carsten, snip First, I think that most statements about what Org-mode is are outdated. Many of them are quite good, but they represent the previous state of an evolving system and so fail to capture the full scope. To my mind, Org-mode is a research programming interface written by and for scientists who take very seriously certain core values of the scientific enterprise--reproducibility, open access, and open source (a partial list). Strongly disagree with the sentiment. My undergraduate degree may gave been Physics, but I work as a freelance paralegal. I use Org Mode for project (file) planning, scheduling, drafting documents, etc. Also, I believe that there are some very active participants on this list who are not scientists and have made great contributions. +1. Although I'm also a scientist (mathematics), I used Org-mode /once/ for science, and it turned out that I felt very much constrained and quickly got back to LaTeX, where I felt much more comfortable. http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski Adam Mickiewicz University This is starting to remind me of bike-shedding. Org-mode is a toolbox providing various things that can work toward whatever end one wants. It's agnostic to field. It doesn't really matter what the end uses are -- Org-mode is what functions it provides. How those are combined by others in various fields, lines of work, or so on are simply illustrations of it's capabilities with respect to neat ways of combining various aspects of what Org is. Thus, I wouldn't try to pitch these things one way or another (Org is great for paralegals or Org is the answer for those doing re-producible research); I'd simply list what it does as what is is and what it can be used for as a way to entice new users and help get into the top results of some google searches for tools/solutions/etc.. It seems we all get what it really is, (TODOs/agenda, universal markdown - export to tons of formats, allowing mixing of prose/code/results, and so on), but are sort of trying to lay claim to why these tools make it best suited toward some particular field. Whether you use one of Org's features or all of them, it is what it is and this can be highlighted in a neat manner and made appealing to those looking for help in these relevant areas of life. John -- Thomas S. Dye http://www.tsdye.com
