Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > François Pinard <pin...@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > > > I'm not sure I'm using "# <<tag>>" correctly, but my feeling is that it > > should stick to the following text in various Org operations. Let's say > > I have something like (as I think it): > > "# <<tag>>" is a deprecated construct. I suggest to avoid bothering with > it. > >
With all due respect, that is not a satisfactory answer. I, for one (or for two: François would surely appreciate it too), would appreciate a pointer to the deprecation notice (I don't remember seeing one but that doesn't mean much), and a pointer (if different) to whatever construct is supposed to replace it. Thanks, Nick
