Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaz...@gmail.com> writes:
> As I said, the "end of line" is not a structural unit. Implementing that > "feature", which, I must admit, I find cheesy, back will be fragile and > confusing. > > For example, white spaces after an object still belong to an > object. Well, this is counterintuitive. > So in the following case: > > [[http://orgmode.org]] [[http://duckduckgo.com]] > > using C-c C-o between the two links will open the first one, but there: > > [[http://orgmode.org]] and [[http://duckduckgo.com]] > > C-c C-o on the "and" will open the second one. This current behavior is surprising too here, and only predictable for users who know that whitespaces are part of the previous object -- i.e. nobody. > Also in the following example: > > [fn:1] This is some text [[http://orgmode.org]] > > C-c C-o on "some" currently triggers `org-footnote-action' since point > is in a footnote definition. Which is counterintuitive too! > But with the behaviour you describe, it would be hard to predict > whether it should move to the link or still open the footnote. Let me describe the behavior I favor: C-c C-o opens the link at point (i.e. "the link that the cursor is visibly on") or the next link on the same line. When on a headline and if there are several links on the same line, prompt the user for which one she wants to visit. I find it very simple and predictable. > There are many other examples. This "convenient feature" is > unpredictable and not worth implementing back (not counting the fact > that it wouldn't be totally trivial to do properly). Sorry, but the current behavior feels just too wrong. -- Bastien
