Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2021-10-23 Thread Timothy
Hi  Carlos,

Just a minor point from me, this really should be a new thread IMO. While not
much may have happened with the IETF RFC, it’s still something on my mind that I
hope to get back to eventually.

All the best,
Timothy


Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2021-10-23 Thread Carlos Pita
Hi Igor,

> The conversation was about keywords and similar constructs (i.e.
> ^#+keyword). You are looking at property drawer and properties inside.
> There is no preference here, though internally properties in property
> drawer are all converted to upper case.

Ok, thank you very much for the clarification.

>> But then c-a-p is very lenient since it lists lower and upper case block
>> variants even when I typed a lower case prefix, and upper case usually
>> will go first in the list, hence promoting a seemingly bad practice.
>
> Could you clarify what is "c-a-p"?

Yes, I just meant completion-at-point. At least some org functions,
which I believe are implemented using pcomplete and then exposed through
the completion-at-point interface, provide completions in both lower and
uppercase variants and except when completion-ignore-case is nil (not
the default) uppercase candidates will be sorted first in the list.
It's often quite inconvenient to scroll down a completion menu to pick
the lowercase completion for a short prefix, which either promotes using
the uppercase variant at hand or offsets the benefits of
autocompletion. Moreover, popular external collections of snippets have
already adopted the lowercase convention of org-mode, hence introducing
inconsistency in the document when one mixes both sources of completion
(lowercase snippets and org-mode uppercase completions). So perhaps
uppercase completions should be provided only when the user explicitly
typed an uppercase prefix. What do you think?

Best regards,
Carlos



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2021-10-23 Thread Ihor Radchenko
Carlos Pita  writes:

>> Org is standardized on lower case. Uppercase is used in the manual as
>> a poor man's bold, and supported for historical reasons.
>
> But C-c C-x p still inserts stuff like:
>
>:PROPERTIES:
>:ARCHIVE:  ...
>:END:
>
> Maybe it should be updated or maybe I don't fully understand the
> convention, perhaps it's just for blocks?

The conversation was about keywords and similar constructs (i.e.
^#+keyword). You are looking at property drawer and properties inside.
There is no preference here, though internally properties in property
drawer are all converted to upper case.

> But then c-a-p is very lenient since it lists lower and upper case block
> variants even when I typed a lower case prefix, and upper case usually
> will go first in the list, hence promoting a seemingly bad practice.

Could you clarify what is "c-a-p"?

Best,
Ihor



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2021-10-21 Thread Carlos Pita
Hi,

in https://list.orgmode.org/87tuuw3n15@nicolasgoaziou.fr/#t it's stated:

> Org is standardized on lower case. Uppercase is used in the manual as
> a poor man's bold, and supported for historical reasons.

But C-c C-x p still inserts stuff like:

   :PROPERTIES:
   :ARCHIVE:  ...
   :END:

Maybe it should be updated or maybe I don't fully understand the
convention, perhaps it's just for blocks?

But then c-a-p is very lenient since it lists lower and upper case block
variants even when I typed a lower case prefix, and upper case usually
will go first in the list, hence promoting a seemingly bad practice.

Can you clarify?

Thank you in advance,
Carlos





Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2021-03-22 Thread Timothy


Hello again,

I'm still a fan of Org as an IETF registered MEME type, but I recently
heard of what Rust did to get text/rust registered on Linux systems:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=90487

Perhaps we could submit a similar patch?

--
Timothy.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Palak Mathur




> On Oct 24, 2020, at 10:40 AM, Bastien  wrote:
> 
> Palak Mathur  writes:
> 
>> Yes, it is going to be some work. I will try to get something
>> started and share a draft.
> 
> Can you and Leo work together on this ?
> 
> Perhaps you can share a first draft (from the user point of view) that
> Leo can consolidate (from a generic parser point of view) ?
> 

Sure! 

> Thanks to both for your help!
> 





> -- 
> Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Bastien
Palak Mathur  writes:

> Yes, it is going to be some work. I will try to get something
> started and share a draft.

Can you and Leo work together on this ?

Perhaps you can share a first draft (from the user point of view) that
Leo can consolidate (from a generic parser point of view) ?

Thanks to both for your help!

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Bastien
Hi Leo,

Leo Vivier  writes:

> Bastien  writes:
>
>> Sorry, perhaps I was not clear: (1) and (2) do not need to be separate
>> documents.
>
> No, you were quite clear.  I just surmised that two documents would be
> required, but upon thinking about it some more, (1) and (2) would make
> for a cohesive whole.

Okay -- perhaps we'll decide otherwise when we can judge by the content.

>> Great, thanks for volunteering.  I think this is something you should
>> perhaps do with a long time Org user, ping-pong'ing with commits, not
>> alone.
>
> Sure, I’d be up for that.

Thanks!  Anyone else to work on this with Leo?

>> Would it be okay for you if we rename worg/dev/org-syntax.org to
>> something like worg/dev/org-elements-syntax.org or would that be
>> confusing?
>
> Since we already have worg/dev/org-element-api.org [1], I think the
> rename to worg/dev/org-element-syntax.org would be welcome.

(Just to be clear, since the quotation context suggests otherwise, I
was really asking Nicolas, as he's the author of this document.)

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Palak Mathur



Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 24, 2020, at 7:50 AM, Bastien  wrote:
> 
> Hi Palak,
> 
> Palak Mathur  writes:
> 
>> I am fairly new to Org. Let me see if I can use it as a markup in an
>> Editor other than Emacs. I will report on what syntax options are very
>> Emacs specific, what are general and what can be ported.
> 
> Thanks!  I think it is less a matter of *what* is described in
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html rather than *how* it is
> described.
> 
> As the first paragraph says: 
> 
>  "This document describes and comments Org syntax as it is currently
>  read by its parser (Org Elements)"
> 
> while we need a description of Org's syntax from the point of view of 
> (1) a human writer and (2) any possible Org parser.
> 
I understand that. 

> I don't know how difficult it is, but I suspect it is quite a lot of
> work.
> 

Yes, it is going to be some work. I will try to get something started and share 
a draft. 


> -- 
> Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Leo Vivier
Bastien  writes:

> Sorry, perhaps I was not clear: (1) and (2) do not need to be separate
> documents.

No, you were quite clear.  I just surmised that two documents would be
required, but upon thinking about it some more, (1) and (2) would make
for a cohesive whole.

> Great, thanks for volunteering.  I think this is something you should
> perhaps do with a long time Org user, ping-pong'ing with commits, not
> alone.

Sure, I’d be up for that.

> Would it be okay for you if we rename worg/dev/org-syntax.org to
> something like worg/dev/org-elements-syntax.org or would that be
> confusing?

Since we already have worg/dev/org-element-api.org [1], I think the
rename to worg/dev/org-element-syntax.org would be welcome.

Notes :
[1] https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-element-api.html

-- 
Leo Vivier
Freelance Software Engineer
Website: www.leovivier.com | Blog: www.zaeph.net



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Bastien
Hi Leo,

Leo Vivier  writes:

> Bastien  writes:
>
>> As the first paragraph says: 
>>
>>   "This document describes and comments Org syntax as it is currently
>>   read by its parser (Org Elements)"
>>
>> while we need a description of Org's syntax from the point of view of 
>> (1) a human writer and (2) any possible Org parser.
>
> I agree that (1) and (2) should be two different documents.  

Sorry, perhaps I was not clear: (1) and (2) do not need to be separate
documents. I think both can be described in a single document, my main
point was that the current org-syntax.org is from none of these points
of view.

> (2) would
> be especially interesting since there are quite a few projects afoot to
> parse Org documents outside of Emacs:
> - go-org (Go)
>   https://github.com/niklasfasching/go-org
> - orgize (Rust)
>   https://docs.rs/orgize/0.8.4/orgize/
>
> They are in various stages of advancement, but a design document would
> go a long way in federating those efforts.
>
>> I don't know how difficult it is, but I suspect it is quite a lot of
>> work.
>
> I assume that it would be, yes.  However, as someone with a vested
> interest in developing an efficient external parser for Org documents,
> I’d love to contribute.  I’ve been playing around lately with ox.el to
> write an exporter to Jupyter (more on that soon), and since it makes
> extensive use of org-element.el, I’d have a modicum of knowledge upon
> which I could initiate the effort.

Great, thanks for volunteering.  I think this is something you should
perhaps do with a long time Org user, ping-pong'ing with commits, not
alone.

Nicolas, what's your take on this?

Would it be okay for you if we rename worg/dev/org-syntax.org to
something like worg/dev/org-elements-syntax.org or would that be
confusing?

Would you have any advice on how to tackle worg/org-syntax.org in a
generic and useful way?

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Leo Vivier
Hi there,

Bastien  writes:

> As the first paragraph says: 
>
>   "This document describes and comments Org syntax as it is currently
>   read by its parser (Org Elements)"
>
> while we need a description of Org's syntax from the point of view of 
> (1) a human writer and (2) any possible Org parser.

I agree that (1) and (2) should be two different documents.  (2) would
be especially interesting since there are quite a few projects afoot to
parse Org documents outside of Emacs:
- go-org (Go)
  https://github.com/niklasfasching/go-org
- orgize (Rust)
  https://docs.rs/orgize/0.8.4/orgize/

They are in various stages of advancement, but a design document would
go a long way in federating those efforts.

> I don't know how difficult it is, but I suspect it is quite a lot of
> work.

I assume that it would be, yes.  However, as someone with a vested
interest in developing an efficient external parser for Org documents,
I’d love to contribute.  I’ve been playing around lately with ox.el to
write an exporter to Jupyter (more on that soon), and since it makes
extensive use of org-element.el, I’d have a modicum of knowledge upon
which I could initiate the effort.

Best,

-- 
Leo Vivier
Freelance Software Engineer
Website: www.leovivier.com | Blog: www.zaeph.net



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Bastien
Hi Palak,

Palak Mathur  writes:

> I am fairly new to Org. Let me see if I can use it as a markup in an
> Editor other than Emacs. I will report on what syntax options are very
> Emacs specific, what are general and what can be ported.

Thanks!  I think it is less a matter of *what* is described in
https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html rather than *how* it is
described.

As the first paragraph says: 

  "This document describes and comments Org syntax as it is currently
  read by its parser (Org Elements)"

while we need a description of Org's syntax from the point of view of 
(1) a human writer and (2) any possible Org parser.

I don't know how difficult it is, but I suspect it is quite a lot of
work.

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Palak Mathur



> On Oct 24, 2020, at 7:09 AM, Bastien  wrote:
> 
> Hi Wes,
> 
> Wes Hardaker  writes:
> 
>> Ok, I'll try to create a template we can fill out in github next week
>> (I'm swamped this week with a deadline).
> 
> If you manage to make any progress on this, please share it with the
> whole list so that interested people can possibly follow.
> 
> For the record, I think we should first enhance the Worg documentation
> on Org's syntax before applying to register Org as a MIME type.  
> 
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html is useful but my feeling
> is that it describes Org "syntax" from the point of view of the Emacs
> parser -- we surely need something a bit more agnostic for registering
> Org as MIME type.
> 
> I'm adding this as a call for help on https://updates.orgmode.org.
> 
> Best,
> 

I am fairly new to Org. Let me see if I can use it as a markup in an Editor 
other than Emacs. I will report on what syntax options are very Emacs specific, 
what are general and what can be ported. 



> -- 
> Bastien
> 



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-24 Thread Bastien
Hi Wes,

Wes Hardaker  writes:

> Ok, I'll try to create a template we can fill out in github next week
> (I'm swamped this week with a deadline).

If you manage to make any progress on this, please share it with the
whole list so that interested people can possibly follow.

For the record, I think we should first enhance the Worg documentation
on Org's syntax before applying to register Org as a MIME type.  

https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html is useful but my feeling
is that it describes Org "syntax" from the point of view of the Emacs
parser -- we surely need something a bit more agnostic for registering
Org as MIME type.

I'm adding this as a call for help on https://updates.orgmode.org.

Best,

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-14 Thread Nicolas Goaziou
Hello,

"Lennart C. Karssen"  writes:

> Wouldn't it be a good idea to standardise on either uppercase or
> lowercase? Limitting the standard to only one of the two case options
> will probably spark a huge debate on which one to choose because one
> side would have to change their behaviour. But at least for the Org code
> that is generated automatically like in the above case of the default
> export template I think choosing a 'preferred' option that is consistent
> with the syntax document and the manual would help.

Org is standardized on lower case. Uppercase is used in the manual as
a poor man's bold, and supported for historical reasons.

Regards,
-- 
Nicolas Goaziou



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-14 Thread Lennart C. Karssen
Hi all,

On 01-10-2020 05:40, TEC wrote:
> 
> Bastien  writes:
> 
>> If there is absolutely zero burden put on the shoulders of Org's
>> maintainers, then I'm all for it.
> 
> From the look of things, there's just effort in the initial creation.
> 
>>> I think it would serve well the proliferation and
>>> popularization of org-mode.
>>
>> Agreed.
> 
> This is the main reason why I'm a fan of the idea :)
> 
>> Is anyone willing to check that there are no constraints?
> 
> I've read through https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838 and I couldn't see
> any constraints placed on us beyond the initial registration's
> requirements.
> 
> For that, I think a formal syntax specification would be needed. Perhaps
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html will do? It looks complete.


One of the things I have been wondering about with regard to Org syntax
is the use of capital letters vs. lowercase ones for e.g. blocks and
options.

The org-syntax.html document linked above lists blocks as
#+BEGIN_NAME/#+END_NAME, #+KEY: VALUE, #+CALL: VALUE, #+ATTR_BACKEND,
etc. all in uppercase.

On the other hand, the manual states in the introduction: "Keywords and
blocks are written in uppercase to enhance their readability, but you
can use lowercase in your Org files."

At the same time, when I run org-export-dispatch to insert the default
export template (via C-c C-e # default on Org 9.3) I get all #+options,
#+title, etc. lines in lowercase.


Wouldn't it be a good idea to standardise on either uppercase or
lowercase? Limitting the standard to only one of the two case options
will probably spark a huge debate on which one to choose because one
side would have to change their behaviour. But at least for the Org code
that is generated automatically like in the above case of the default
export template I think choosing a 'preferred' option that is consistent
with the syntax document and the manual would help.


Best regards,

Lennart.

> 
> I'm hoping we could then use https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7763
> (registration of text/markdown) as a template, where we could just link
> to the syntax specification.
> 
> Perhaps it could be worth putting the syntax spec under the main site as
> something like orgmode.org/syntax-spec.html.
> 
> I've also been considering spinning off the manual into a bit of a
> specification document (e.g. less of a guide / how-to, stripped down to
> just the bare information), so perhaps
> orgmode.org/specification.html#syntax ? I'd really like some second
> opinions.
> 
>> Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?
> 
> In about two months, I am.
> 
> It looks like creating and draft and then emailing it to
> media-ty...@iana.org would probably be the best approach.
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Timothy.
> 

-- 
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
L.C. Karssen
The Netherlands

lenn...@karssen.org
http://blog.karssen.org
GPG key ID: A88F554A
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-06 Thread Palak Mathur


> On Oct 6, 2020, at 2:03 PM, TEC  wrote:
> 
> 
> Wes Hardaker  writes:
> 
>> Ok, I'll try to create a template we can fill out in github next week
>> (I'm swamped this week with a deadline).
> 
> Sounds good :) I'm fairly busy for the next ~month and a half anyway so
> I'm happy to accommodate delays.
> 
> Would it be a good idea to use the markdown RFC as a template? That's
> what I was originally thinking.
> 

Let me know if you need help. I can help out as well.


> Thanks,
> 
> Timothy.
> 



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-06 Thread TEC



Wes Hardaker  writes:

Ok, I'll try to create a template we can fill out in github next 
week

(I'm swamped this week with a deadline).


Sounds good :) I'm fairly busy for the next ~month and a half 
anyway so

I'm happy to accommodate delays.

Would it be a good idea to use the markdown RFC as a template? 
That's

what I was originally thinking.

Thanks,

Timothy.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-06 Thread Wes Hardaker
TEC  writes:

> Wes Hardaker  writes:
> 
> > IETF person here.  If you want help or a co-author, I can help if
> > needed.
> >
> > [not a mime expert, but I've been involved with the IETF for ~25
> > years]
> 
> Fantastic! I've never summited an RFC or interacted with the IETF
> before in my life, so that sounds great to me :)

Ok, I'll try to create a template we can fill out in github next week
(I'm swamped this week with a deadline).
-- 
Wes Hardaker 
My Pictures:   http://capturedonearth.com/
My Thoughts:   http://blog.capturedonearth.com/



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-01 Thread TEC



Wes Hardaker  writes:

IETF person here.  If you want help or a co-author, I can help 
if needed.


[not a mime expert, but I've been involved with the IETF for ~25 
years]


Fantastic! I've never summited an RFC or interacted with the IETF 
before

in my life, so that sounds great to me :)

Thanks for volunteering,

Timothy.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-01 Thread Wes Hardaker
TEC  writes:

> > Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?
> 
> In about two months, I am.

IETF person here.  If you want help or a co-author, I can help if needed.

[not a mime expert, but I've been involved with the IETF for ~25 years]
-- 
Wes Hardaker 
My Pictures:   http://capturedonearth.com/
My Thoughts:   http://blog.capturedonearth.com/



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-10-01 Thread Bastien
TEC  writes:

> I see. Would there be someone well suited to check that everything is
> accurate? I wouldn't feel confident auditing the whole document by
> myself.

Well, "we" of course includes Nicolas and other core contributors, but
anyone is welcome.  This should not be done by a single person.

> Mmm. My thoughts on having lots on Worg haven't changed, I was just
> thinking it might seem more 'official' / better if the page were
> nearer to the site root.

I get that, but I feel it is not needed.

> This was partly motivated from it sometimes being annoying to just
> check what forms an element can take and not finding it easy to see in
> the manual.

If org-syntax.org becomes stable enough in Worg, we can link to this
page from the manual when necessary.

Thanks!

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-30 Thread TEC



Bastien  writes:

You register once and for all?  Is there some red tape involved 
in

maintaining the registration?


Assuming I haven't misread/missed anything, the only thing that we 
might
cause a change is if the specification changes - but since it 
looks like
we can just link to our specification we probably wouldn't even 
need to

do that.


For that, I think a formal syntax specification would be
needed. Perhaps https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html 
will

do? It looks complete.


We should first read 
https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html
and carefully check that it is up to date and still accurate, 
then
make it more user oriented (for now it more developers 
oriented.)


I see. Would there be someone well suited to check that everything 
is

accurate? I wouldn't feel confident auditing the whole document by
myself.


I'm ready to work on this before the end of the year.


Marvellous!

Perhaps it could be worth putting the syntax spec under the 
main

site as something like orgmode.org/syntax-spec.html.


I would not go into this direction: as you know, I'd like the 
home
of orgmode.org to be just one page (index.org/html) and move 
other

pages to Worg.  So let's not move org-syntax.org to the website,
it is good as a worg resource.


Mmm. My thoughts on having lots on Worg haven't changed, I was 
just
thinking it might seem more 'official' / better if the page were 
nearer

to the site root.

I've also been considering spinning off the manual into a bit 
of a
specification document (e.g. less of a guide / how-to, stripped 
down

to just the bare information), so perhaps
orgmode.org/specification.html#syntax ? I'd really like some 
second

opinions.


This would be too many docs to maintain.


This was partly motivated from it sometimes being annoying to just
check what forms an element can take and not finding it easy to 
see in

the manual.

Yea, maintaining /another/ file doesn't seem like a good idea 
though...



Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?


In about two months, I am.


Okay, thanks!  Let's work on stabilizing Org syntax and 
reconsider the
registration idea then.  I will also ping future maintainers on 
this.


Sounds good! Thanks for being open to the idea :)

All the best,

Timothy.





Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-30 Thread Bastien
Hi Timothy,

TEC  writes:

>> Is anyone willing to check that there are no constraints?
>
> I've read through https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838 and I couldn't
> see any constraints placed on us beyond the initial registration's
> requirements.

You register once and for all?  Is there some red tape involved in
maintaining the registration?

> For that, I think a formal syntax specification would be
> needed. Perhaps https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html will
> do? It looks complete.

We should first read https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html
and carefully check that it is up to date and still accurate, then
make it more user oriented (for now it more developers oriented.)

I'm ready to work on this before the end of the year.

> Perhaps it could be worth putting the syntax spec under the main
> site as something like orgmode.org/syntax-spec.html.

I would not go into this direction: as you know, I'd like the home 
of orgmode.org to be just one page (index.org/html) and move other
pages to Worg.  So let's not move org-syntax.org to the website,
it is good as a worg resource.

> I've also been considering spinning off the manual into a bit of a
> specification document (e.g. less of a guide / how-to, stripped down
> to just the bare information), so perhaps
> orgmode.org/specification.html#syntax ? I'd really like some second
> opinions.

This would be too many docs to maintain.

>> Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?
>
> In about two months, I am.

Okay, thanks!  Let's work on stabilizing Org syntax and reconsider the
registration idea then.  I will also ping future maintainers on this.

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-30 Thread TEC



Bastien  writes:


If there is absolutely zero burden put on the shoulders of Org's
maintainers, then I'm all for it.


From the look of things, there's just effort in the initial 

creation.


I think it would serve well the proliferation and
popularization of org-mode.


Agreed.


This is the main reason why I'm a fan of the idea :)


Is anyone willing to check that there are no constraints?


I've read through https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838 and I 
couldn't see
any constraints placed on us beyond the initial registration's 
requirements.


For that, I think a formal syntax specification would be needed. 
Perhaps
https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html will do? It looks 
complete.


I'm hoping we could then use https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7763
(registration of text/markdown) as a template, where we could just 
link

to the syntax specification.

Perhaps it could be worth putting the syntax spec under the main 
site as

something like orgmode.org/syntax-spec.html.

I've also been considering spinning off the manual into a bit of a
specification document (e.g. less of a guide / how-to, stripped 
down to

just the bare information), so perhaps
orgmode.org/specification.html#syntax ? I'd really like some 
second

opinions.


Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?


In about two months, I am.

It looks like creating and draft and then emailing it to
media-ty...@iana.org would probably be the best approach.

All the best,

Timothy.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-24 Thread Andrea
Hi,

What are the pros?

About the cons: maybe we need to look more into the requirements.

I am looking at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2048 and the one that
concerns me a little is 2.2.6: I guess somebody would need to write a
bit of docs about security concerns. Or you can go the way Markdown did
it: from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7763#section-2

"Security considerations:

  Markdown interpreted as plain text is relatively harmless.  A text
  editor need only display the text.  The editor SHOULD take care to
  handle control characters appropriately and to limit the effect of
  the Markdown to the text-editing area itself; malicious Unicode-
  based Markdown could, for example, surreptitiously change the
  directionality of the text.  An editor for normal text would
  already take these control characters into consideration, however.

  Markdown interpreted as a precursor to other formats, such as
  HTML, carries all of the security considerations as the target
  formats.  For example, HTML can contain instructions to execute
  scripts, redirect the user to other web pages, download remote
  content, and upload personally identifiable information.  Markdown
  also can contain islands of formal markup, such as HTML.  These
  islands of formal markup may be passed as they are, transformed,
  or ignored (perhaps because the islands are conditional or
  incompatible) when the Markdown is processed.  Since Markdown may
  have different interpretations depending on the tool and the
  environment, a better approach is to analyze (and sanitize or
  block) the output markup, rather than attempting to analyze the
  Markdown.
"

Do they have an org-babel?

Thanks,

Andrea



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-24 Thread Andrea
Hi,

What are the pros?

About the cons: maybe we need to look more into the requirements.

I am looking at https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2048 and the one that
concerns me a little is 2.2.6: I guess somebody would need to write a
bit of docs about security concerns. Or you can go the way Markdown did
it: from https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7763#section-2

"Security considerations:

  Markdown interpreted as plain text is relatively harmless.  A text
  editor need only display the text.  The editor SHOULD take care to
  handle control characters appropriately and to limit the effect of
  the Markdown to the text-editing area itself; malicious Unicode-
  based Markdown could, for example, surreptitiously change the
  directionality of the text.  An editor for normal text would
  already take these control characters into consideration, however.

  Markdown interpreted as a precursor to other formats, such as
  HTML, carries all of the security considerations as the target
  formats.  For example, HTML can contain instructions to execute
  scripts, redirect the user to other web pages, download remote
  content, and upload personally identifiable information.  Markdown
  also can contain islands of formal markup, such as HTML.  These
  islands of formal markup may be passed as they are, transformed,
  or ignored (perhaps because the islands are conditional or
  incompatible) when the Markdown is processed.  Since Markdown may
  have different interpretations depending on the tool and the
  environment, a better approach is to analyze (and sanitize or
  block) the output markup, rather than attempting to analyze the
  Markdown.
"

Do they have an org-babel?

Thanks,

Andrea



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-23 Thread Bastien
Hi,

hj-orgmod...@hj.proberto.com writes:

> I do not have much insight into all the possible outcomes (i.e. I am
> clueless about such outcomes) except one outcome - orgmode MIME type
> gets registered.  

If there is absolutely zero burden put on the shoulders of Org's
maintainers, then I'm all for it.

> I think it would serve well the proliferation and
> popularization of org-mode. 

Agreed.

Is anyone willing to check that there are no constraints?

Is anyone willing to move forward with this registration?

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-17 Thread hj-orgmode-1



 I do not have much insight into all the possible outcomes (i.e. I am 
clueless about such outcomes) except one outcome - orgmode MIME type 
gets registered.  I think it would serve well the proliferation and 
popularization of org-mode. I.e. I do not see any negatives, only 
positives. After successful registration, I don't think anyone would 
really complain that their "Lotus Organiser" or organ audio samples do 
not get processed as usual.


 AFAIC, push this.

 H J

On 9/17/20 9:09 AM, TEC wrote:

I'm still hoping for that discussion :P

To the Org community, if you have thoughts on this - please share them
:)

Timothy.

Me earlier:

Bastien  writes:

Let's discuss this with care, and consider all possible outcomes.

This is /exactly/ what I was hoping to prompt with this email.
I think it would be a nice idea (assuming feasibility), but it's
certainly not something to rush.




Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-17 Thread TEC


I'm still hoping for that discussion :P

To the Org community, if you have thoughts on this - please share them
:)

Timothy.

Me earlier:
> Bastien  writes:
>> Let's discuss this with care, and consider all possible outcomes.
>
> This is /exactly/ what I was hoping to prompt with this email.
> I think it would be a nice idea (assuming feasibility), but it's
> certainly not something to rush.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-04 Thread TEC



Just a quick note from me.

Bastien  writes:
Let's discuss this with care, and consider all possible 
outcomes.


This is /exactly/ what I was hoping to prompt with this email.
I think it would be a nice idea (assuming feasibility), but it's
certainly not something to rush.

All the best,

Timothy.



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-04 Thread Bastien
Hi,

stardiviner  writes:

> I would like to see this result too. Great to know this :)

Well, there is no "result" expected yet, because we did not yet
agreed to make a formal request.

Let's discuss this with care, and consider all possible outcomes.

Thanks,

-- 
 Bastien



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-04 Thread stardiviner


I would like to see this result too. Great to know this :)

TEC  writes:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Prompted by the fact that Markdown is registered as a MIME type
> (RFC7763) and perusing the MIME registration procedure (RFC6838),
> I wonder if it may be possible to register Org as a MIME type?
>
> There are a few parts of RFC6838 in particular which give me hope, 
> such
> as:
>> [§4.9] universal support and implementation of a media type are 
>> NOT a
>> requirement for registration.
>
> I'm guessing the main barrier wold be a the lack of a published
> specification --- I'm guessing a complete version of
> https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html published under the 
> main
> site (i.e. https://orgmode.org/standard.html) would be required.
>
> Looking for other uses of the .org extension, there doesn't seem 
> to be
> much. The main result is from "Lotus Organiser", which seems to be 
> a
> (discontinued) PIM from IBM which used .org as its file type in 
> the 1992
> release. Other than that it seems that Yamaha and SoundBlaster 
> have used
> it as an extension for organ audio samples.
>
> If it does seem possible to have text/org formally added as a mime 
> type,
> I would love to push this.
>
> Please let me know what you think.
>
> All the best,
>
> Timothy.


-- 
[ stardiviner ]
   I try to make every word tell the meaning that I want to express.

   Blog: https://stardiviner.github.io/
   IRC(freenode): stardiviner, Matrix: stardiviner
   GPG: F09F650D7D674819892591401B5DF1C95AE89AC3



Re: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type

2020-09-04 Thread Gustav Wikström
That would be very nice indeed.

/Gustav

From: Emacs-orgmode  on behalf of 
TEC 
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 4:44:50 PM
To: org-mode-email 
Subject: Shower thought: submit an IETF RFC to register Org as a MIME type


Hi everyone,

Prompted by the fact that Markdown is registered as a MIME type
(RFC7763) and perusing the MIME registration procedure (RFC6838),
I wonder if it may be possible to register Org as a MIME type?

There are a few parts of RFC6838 in particular which give me hope,
such
as:
> [§4.9] universal support and implementation of a media type are
> NOT a
> requirement for registration.

I'm guessing the main barrier wold be a the lack of a published
specification --- I'm guessing a complete version of
https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html published under the
main
site (i.e. https://orgmode.org/standard.html) would be required.

Looking for other uses of the .org extension, there doesn't seem
to be
much. The main result is from "Lotus Organiser", which seems to be
a
(discontinued) PIM from IBM which used .org as its file type in
the 1992
release. Other than that it seems that Yamaha and SoundBlaster
have used
it as an extension for organ audio samples.

If it does seem possible to have text/org formally added as a mime
type,
I would love to push this.

Please let me know what you think.

All the best,

Timothy.