Hello, No Wayman <iarchivedmywholel...@gmail.com> writes:
> * [RFC] DOCT: Declarative Org Capture Templates Thank you for your work. I have some comments. Disclaimer: I am only using very basic capture templates. So, I cannot comment realistically on the new syntax you suggest. In particular, the example you give is way too complex for me to understand the benefits of your syntax. I suggest to start out with showing simple use-cases. Anyway, I hope more advanced capture template users can chime in and comment your design. My beginner questions are the following : - Is it compatible with the current syntax? If it isn't, is there a way to ease transition to the new syntax? - Is it simple to use on simple use-cases? - Is it more capable than the current syntax, i.e., does it handle situations that are not possible, even in a convoluted way, currently? > - DOCT validates templates before runtime execution. > > For exmaple, you have a template with an entry type of `'entry' > and you forget the leading star in the template string. > Days later you go to use that template. It's borked. This is different from introducing a new syntax for capture templates. Actually, `org-insert-place-item' and `org-capture-place-table-line' both try to fix misshaped templates already. OTOH `org-capture-place-entry' merely calls `org-capture-verify-tree' on the template, i.e., it barfs if the template is ill-defined. It is a discrepancy we could fix independently on your new syntax. I invite you to propose a patch for `org-capture-place-entry' so it does a better job at fixing the initial template, if needed. I'll gladly apply it. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
