Kaushal Modi <kaushal.m...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 5:35 PM Eric Abrahamsen > <e...@ericabrahamsen.net> wrote: > > Would there be any consideration for an inline syntax that looks > more > like a link? Personally, when I want inline TODOs, I want them > because > there's a particular chunk of text that I need to do something > with. > What about something that looks like: > > In 2005 there were approximately [[TODO: Verify this; SCHEDULED: > <tomorrow>; :statistics:][4,500]] Confucius Institutes in > operation > worldwide. > > How would you distinguish between regular links and such inline TODO's > when the "link" portion is hidden?
I guess I wouldn't, personally, I'd just use the agenda to interact with the TODOs. But there could be a separate option allowing users to control the visibility of inline TODOs independently. I dunno, I was just throwing this out there :) > Would footnotes serve better? (I'm not a consumer of inline todos > (yet?) so consider this suggestion with a grain of salt :)) That's not a bad idea either! I do like links' ability to connect to a specific run of text, but this would also work. Eric
