Bastien <b...@gnu.org> writes: > Thorsten Jolitz <tjol...@gmail.com> writes: > >> That means that Org headlines are much more 'intelligent' than outline >> headlines (they know about todos, priorities, tags, timestamps, >> properties, planning, clocking, being archived etc.) and one could >> have that kind of intelligent headlines in other modes too with a true >> org-minor-mode. > > Joke aside, did you closely look at orgstruct-mode? > I guess so if you started outorg.el.
Yes! Actually, omm.el is a merge of outshine.el and the orgstruct section from org.el, i.e. the entire orgstruct code has been copied to omm.el and therefore could be removed from org.el in case org-minor-mode ever becomes reality (and omm.el part of org-mode). I think org(struct)-style list and table editing in other text-modes is a kind of special case for an org-minor-mode, though a very useful one. The default case would be its (mode agnostic) use in programming modes and with outcommented text. In that case outshine and outorg/poporg offer some useful ideas and functionality too. > My point is: I'd rather improve orgstruct-mode than rethink > an org-minor-mode from scratch. But that's just me of course. I think outorg and poporg are quite heavy competitors to org(struct)-style list and table editing, since they offer the full power of Org-mode, work in comment sections and docstrings (too), and avoid possible mode conflicts by simply reverting the `org-edit-special' idea => work in a programming mode and launch temporary org-mode edit buffers for occasional text editing. So for text/list/table editing I think there could be user options for deciding between orgstruct and/or outorg&poporg, so that none of the existing efforts is lost. The real value and innovation of a true org-minor-mode would be to introduce Org's intelligent headlines and all the related functionality into the world of outcommented text in programming modes. -- cheers, Thorsten
