That sounds reasonable. Updated patch attached. Cheers,
Derek On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 5:16 AM Rudolf Adamkovič <[email protected]> wrote: > Derek Chen-Becker <[email protected]> writes: > > > I was thinking about this a bit and I have two ideas. The first would > > be to specify "uppercase ASCII alphabetic character", since ASCII does > > not support anything with accents. > > In non-English countries, for all practical purposed, ASCII means 8-bit > "extended ASCII". For example, in Central Europe, the second part of > ASCII would be ISO-8859-2 or CP-1250, containing accented characters. > > > The other would be to use a precise definition based on elisp of > > "characters whose literal form (e.g. A?, B?, etc) evaluates to an > > integer between 65 and 90". > > I would say something like "a capital English alphabet character A > through Z (ASCII code 65 through 90)", which is 100% precise. > > Rudy > -- > "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have > nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free > speech because you have nothing to say." > > --- Edward Snowden, 2015 > > Rudolf Adamkovič <[email protected]> [he/him] > http://adamkovic.org > -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | Derek Chen-Becker | | GPG Key available at https://keybase.io/dchenbecker and | | https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=derek%40chen-becker.org | | Fngrprnt: EB8A 6480 F0A3 C8EB C1E7 7F42 AFC5 AFEE 96E4 6ACC | +---------------------------------------------------------------+
0001-org-syntax.el-Clarify-PRIORITY-value-definition.patch
Description: Binary data
