On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 06:05, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > From my point of view, lists cannot be a subset of headlines. Indeed, > headlines are global structural elements, whereas items are local > structural elements. In other words, moving an item outside of its > scope, which is the list it belongs, will remove any structural meaning > it has.
I don't disagree. > For example, what is the point of moving an un-ordered item into an > ordered list, or, worse, an un-ordered item into a description list? > Sure, the item being moved and the destination list may share the same > structure, but it's only a part of the equation. I frequently use description lists as a quick way to get something like "bold inline headers" for lists of test answers and questions. Often, extended answers will be a description list item of several paragraphs, or several paragraphs with sublists thrown in. The latter doesn't work well. I agree I should probably figure out a better way to organize this information, but it just feels natural at the time and doesn't seem worth the trouble to fix after the fact. > My point is that outside of its list, an item is just plain text. > > Thus, why not take that into account? Instead of creating a magical > function to refile items anywhere, let's just extend `org-refile' to > work on a region of text which is not a sub-tree. > > At the moment, org-refile understands the concept of region, but checks > if that region holds a sub-tree. What about removing that check, and > adapt the code to text without trees? It will then be the user's problem > if he wants to match apples and oranges. Furthermore, as a side effect, > refiling an item would simply mean selecting it and using refile > interface. Brilliant! -- Jeffrey Horn http://www.failuretorefrain.com/jeff/
