thanks Max and Christian for your insights.

about the separator:
> The =::= separator is already in use for line numbers, text search,
> headline names, custom IDs and code references. Its use for metadata
> additions would not be generalizable to 'file:' and 'id:' links where
> this search syntax is useful. In bespoke link types like the one Julien
> shows here, one can do whatever one likes. But a candidate Org syntax for
> link properties, if we want one, should probably use a different
> separator.
Agreed. Such additional metadata could then be stored in an org element object 
simply with an additional ":metadata" field (like the ":search" field currently 
used for everything that follows "::").
I dont know of strong guidelines for the choice of such a separator, except for 
common sense ones. I see that ":~:" is used in the link Max shared, that may be 
a good idea then 
(https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/URI/Reference/Fragment, it's used 
in the link that max pointed out to start highlighting text links).


On the use for arbitrary metadata:
> Although Julien's 'pdf:' link uses these added properties for the same
> purpose as the search syntax (identifying a document fragment), that's
> not the only purpose that link metadata might be useful for. To take my
> web link example, an enhanced 'file:' link might take properties like
> (:attr_html (:title My contact info :rel me)) and add them as HTML
> attributes when publishing to web. That would be orthogonal to the
> purpose of pointing to a document fragment, and one might want use both
> at the same time.
That's a use case, and I see (and use) many others (reliable search for ids, 
opening a music or a video at a specific time stamp).



As Max noted, it may be possible to use a syntax compatible with url links. For 
instance using the notation defined in the shared documentation:
- with #t=<timestamp> to open a video at a specific timestamp for instance
- with "#xywh=<coordinates>" for highlighting a given area in a pdf (and not to 
search text, which is less reliable).

The only downside I see (compared to using plist) is about clarity/readability. 
Links created with such systems intentionally have no white spaces and are 
therefore hard to parse for a human. But that may not be relevant for our 
purpose.
Otherwise, I only see arguments in favor of adopting that system, and I'd be up 
to try it. I may miss something obviously. The best point would be that many 
links that work locally could be open directly in a browser, eg, same notation 
to open a local or youtube video at a given timestamp.

Julien


"Christian Moe" <[email protected]> writes:

> Max Nikulin <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On 09/06/2026 2:23 pm, Julien Dallot wrote:
>>> I feel like the format with a plist inside the link is simple and
>>> understandable enough, while enabling to encode pretty much anything.
>>
>> I find the idea of plist in links as interesting, however, I am
>> afraid, it has no chance to be adapted outside of Emacs. I strongly
>> believe that it should be easy to send links to friends and
>> colleagues. So, if possible, I would stick to existing URL
>> conventions. Some formats have documented ways to specify document






>
> +1, and as Max points out, that applies to PDFs.
>
> But there are other potential uses for adding properties to a link for
> which there are no URL solutions, such as adding html attributes to an
> ordinary web link. With such potential uses in mind, I think that
> Julien's question about representing arbitrary metadata is interesting
> to discuss, but that the proposed syntax has a drawback:
>
>> [[pdf:<path>::(:page 12 :edges (0.240196 0.478535 0.331699 0.494949))]]
>
> The =::= separator is already in use for line numbers, text search,
> headline names, custom IDs and code references. Its use for metadata
> additions would not be generalizable to 'file:' and 'id:' links where
> this search syntax is useful. In bespoke link types like the one Julien
> shows here, one can do whatever one likes. But a candidate Org syntax for
> link properties, if we want one, should probably use a different
> separator.
>
> Although Julien's 'pdf:' link uses these added properties for the same
> purpose as the search syntax (identifying a document fragment), that's
> not the only purpose that link metadata might be useful for. To take my
> web link example, an enhanced 'file:' link might take properties like
> (:attr_html (:title My contact info :rel me)) and add them as HTML
> attributes when publishing to web. That would be orthogonal to the
> purpose of pointing to a document fragment, and one might want use both
> at the same time.
>
> Regards,
> Christian


Reply via email to