On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 04:06:51PM +0200, alain.coch...@unistra.fr wrote:
> Russell Adams writes on Wed 30 Aug 2023 14:36:
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 01:49:26PM +0200, alain.coch...@unistra.fr wrote:
> > > Russell Adams writes on Tue 29 Aug 2023 15:00:
> > > > On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 08:01:16PM +0200, Russell Adams wrote:
> > > > > Why not just put the TODO heading in a code block with type org?
> > > > >
> > > > > Then you get all the toys, ignored by the main file.
> > > >
> > > > If inline tasks are supposed to be Org enabled headings, but
> > > > NOT treated like headings in the current file, why not put
> > > > them in a src block?
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't this allow the same functionality without any new syntax
> > > > elements, or silly long *'s?
> > >
> > > Are regular Org tags allowed in this scenario? If not, I'd be
> > > miserable.
> >
> > It's a source block of type Org. That means *everything* that works in
> > Org works inside that block. You might open it with C-c C-' to open it
> > in an indirect buffer to enable everything.
>
> Sorry, that's not enough for me to understand. What would be the
> equivalent of:
>
> * head :foo:
> *************** inlt :bar:
> *************** END
>
> where the 'bar' tag could be used in exactly the same way as the 'foo'
> tag.
Please give some examples of "bar used in exactly the same way as
foo".
Off the top of my head, I can only think that some agenda views and
collapsing to sparse tree may not recognize :bar: because it's inside
a source block.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Adams rlad...@adamsinfoserv.com
https://www.adamsinfoserv.com/
