Christophe Schockaert <r3vli...@citadels.eu> writes: > (my wish would be to have a robust way to handle multilines formating, > but that’s on another topic going on ^^) > > I don’t know what’s the usual process : can’t we file an issue to track > it, and write down the options we have, then decide the outcome of it > (either development, or documenting options and ideas) ?
Just drop an email with appropriate subject. > Regarding the checkbox state, I wanted to have the impression of > maintainers, but I felt that choosing the character would not be easy to > handle not only for development, but even for reading documents from > different sources (custom TODO states have a meaning that we can infer, > but a single letter seems harder). > > As an after thought, about the "[C]" proposal, I wonder if it would not > be better to have a symbol, as "[X]" is not used for the letter, but for > the cross, same for the "space" and the "dash" which express "halfway > through". I didn’t have any idea the other day, but meanwhile, I have > come first with "[~]" which sounds like a wave and thus is not firm, and > is also a bitwise NOT in some programming languages. Or, thinking about > the "NOT", I thought about "[!]" which is a NOT (not done) and also > quite expressive. The only thing is that it is quite catching attention, > like if we need to pay attention for something that was probably not > that important since we cancelled it :) I could not find many other > options, as I feel we need to stick to ASCII for a solution. > > > WDYT ? I think that choosing a character is of a secondary importance. It can be easily adjusted once we have a working code. Getting the working code is much harder though. Someone™ will need to submit a patch first. -- Ihor Radchenko, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at https://orgmode.org/. Support Org development at https://liberapay.com/org-mode, or support my work at https://liberapay.com/yantar92
