TEC writes:
>
> Hence, any and all concerns about feature parity etc. are completely
> resolved. One 'just' needs to implement the bindings and piping (as
> opposed to the whole shebang).
>
Something that I am missing when hacking on org-mode is some form of api
reference. Things like
Thanks for the warm welcome and the amount of inputs and details that
everybody so fast provides.
I'm really impressed by this community.
Ok seems that delivering a language specification in EBNF has some
challenges that can hardly be addressed due to the nature of org-mode
design, but I read
Eric S Fraga writes:
It's not a crazy idea but one which misses one of the best
features of
org mode: it is part of Emacs. For me, a markup language is not
so
exciting: we have plenty of them. What makes org mode powerful
is that
it is infinitely customizable by being part of Emacs. I
On Thursday, 29 Oct 2020 at 22:12, Mauro Mandracchia wrote:
> Is it a crazy idea if Org-Mode could become a DSL rather than a mode for
> emacs?
It's not a crazy idea but one which misses one of the best features of
org mode: it is part of Emacs. For me, a markup language is not so
exciting: we
Hi Mauro,
Welcome! This is definitely not a crazy idea (or at least if it is
then you are in good company).
Org already has wide support as a markup language, and tools like
https://github.com/tecosaur/org-pandoc-import exist that leverage
this,
but the syntax is not standardized and as a
