Are you sure bullet lists are irrelevant to org ?
I tried without success to make a list without "-" or "+" in my *scratch*. Regards Tim Cross <theophil...@gmail.com> writes: > Samuel Wales <samolog...@gmail.com> writes: > >> sure. >> >> iiuc i think op wants 2 things: >> >> 1] graphical bullets. i.e. not the - + etc. that are in the org >> plain text as saved to disk. >> 2] each level of a list to have the same bullet style >> >> >> examples of 2]: >> >> a conforming list: >> >> - this is level 1. for this list, we always want level 1 to >> use the - bullet style in the org plain text. >> + this is level 2. for this list, we always want level 2 >> to use the + bullet style in the org plain text. >> + another level 2 >> - another level 1 >> + another level 2 >> + the + is CONSISTENT with the + in the level 2 of the >> previous list item >> >> >> a non-conforming list: >> >> >> - this is level 1. for this list, we always want level 1 to >> use the - bullet style in the org plain text. >> + this is level 2. for this list, we always want level 2 >> to use the + bullet style in the org plain text. >> + another level 2 >> - another level 1 >> * another level 2 >> * these * markers are INCONSISTENT with the + markers in >> the level 2 previous list item. >> >> >> the idea is for org [as opposed to fontification] to enforce this >> level correspondence. whenever we do a bullet style change at any >> level, org could change ALL BULLETS AT THE SAME LEVEL. this keeps the >> list conforming. >> >> currently, org does not do this. instead, it allows you to >> say that /demotion/ makes a + when you have a -. but >> without enforcement, the list can quickly become >> non-conforming after the user edits it. >> >> this idea is independent (orthogonal) to fontification / >> displayed graphical glyph. i think op's 2] idea can make >> sense. and then fontification / displayed graphical glyph >> can be done perhaps with a fontification package. >> >> in any case, fontification can merely say that + looks >> like 😺 or so. orthogonal to levels. >> >> > > Sorry, but I think this idea is misguided. > > The 'bullets' in lists are largely irrelevant to org. Lists are > determined by the indentation level. I don't think org actually cares > about wither an item starts with '-', '+', or '*'. I also don't think it > matters (from an org perspective) if a list has a mix of different > bullets. This might be 'offensive' for users, but is largely irrelevant > for org. > > This means the questions now becomes "Do we add the additional complexity > and possible performance hit to enforce bullet consistency?" and "Are > there any use cases where people might want different bullets at the > same level in a list?". > > As having mixed bullets does not impact on org export, I'm inclined to > leave this as a user issue i.e. if you want things to be consistent, > then be consistent. The current behaviour I think is pretty good i.e. if > you start using a different bullet, new items at the same level will use > that bullet and when you shift an item to be at the parent level, it > will change the bullet to be the same as the parents. If you indent an > item, it will use the same bullet as the parent, but you can change it > and then all additional items at that level will use the same bullet. > > As the bullet type has no baring on org's processing of lists, I think > this is a purely presentation issue and therefore anything we want to do > wrt enforcement should in fact occur at the font-lock layer. e.g. allow > code which will just set the bullet to some preferred mapping based on > level. As the user won't see which 'real' character is being used, it > won't matter if it uses mixed bullet styles. This also has the advantage > that the user can just use the one bullet 'type' and see different > bullet rendering based on level, so you won't have any 'inconsistency' > anyway as all entries just use the same bullet.
