Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-24 Thread Nicolas Goaziou
Hello, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: In the meantime, what do you think about the solution I propose? I think it is a sensible move. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-23 Thread Bastien
Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: let's finally close this thread, thanks all for your inputs. I'm still waiting for Carsten's input, as I need to know whether introducing the parser in core functions is a goal for Org or not. In the meantime, what do you think about

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-21 Thread Bastien
Hi all, let's finally close this thread, thanks all for your inputs. The solution I suggest is this: 1. implement multi-links opening when C-c C-o is called in a paragraph and there is no link at point (similar behavior than the one we have for links in headlines); 2. let

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-21 Thread Nicolas Goaziou
Hello, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: let's finally close this thread, thanks all for your inputs. I'm still waiting for Carsten's input, as I need to know whether introducing the parser in core functions is a goal for Org or not. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-14 Thread Sebastien Vauban
Matt Lundin wrote: Nicolas is doing amazing work at making org file parsing more systematic, precise, and predictable. (Thank you!) And I agree with him that a function named org-open-link-at-point should, for the sake of precision and consistency, only open a link at the point. I also agree

[O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation (was: link interfering with brackets when abbreviated)

2014-03-03 Thread Bastien
Hi Gustav, Josiah and Michael, thanks *a lot* for your feedback, it triggered an idea I want to turn into a proposal. I changed the subject of this thread to better frame the issue at stake, and explain my proposal. Emacs commands depend on their context: this is the modal approach we love.

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-03 Thread Matt Lundin
Bastien b...@altern.org writes: For most commands, the first literal syntactic interpretation is the only relevant context of interaction: e.g., it would not make sense to try updating a tag outside of a headline (i.e. outside of where a tag is a tag, from the parser's view.) For some

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-03 Thread Nick Dokos
Matt Lundin m...@imapmail.org writes: ... My view is that precision and usability need not be mutually exclusive.Might we have a bunch of precise, modular functions that rely on the new parser? E.g., something like org-open-link-at-point. This would do exactly what it says -- i.e., open a

Re: [O] Context of interaction vs. literal syntactic interpretation

2014-03-03 Thread Jonathan Leech-Pepin
Hello, On 3 March 2014 11:09, Matt Lundin m...@imapmail.org wrote: Bastien b...@altern.org writes: For most commands, the first literal syntactic interpretation is the only relevant context of interaction: e.g., it would not make sense to try updating a tag outside of a headline (i.e.