Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: >> But in that case let me return to and refine my proposal: Why not have >> "drawer" as the default unless "raw" is given? > > Probably because "raw" never breaks your document, and is less verbose > in the simplest cases (e.g., a single list, value, table...), which may > be common enough. > > Anyway, it should be simple enough to switch to "drawer" as a default in > your setup. >
True. >> One could argue, that the extent of the results is implicitly given >> when the results are not "raw", but being explicit here would allow for >> some additional features (such as different background for results -- is >> anyone doing this? I'd be interested). > > "raw" doesn't prevent to add a different background, if needed. > I'd be very interested in that. >> This is the state in org This is what I'd prefer... >> --8<------start-------->8--- --8<------start-------->8--- >> >> #+PROPERTY: results drawer #+PROPERTY: results drawer >> >> >> * Test * Test >> >> #+name: dtrn #+name: dtrn >> #+begin_src R :exports both #+begin_src R :exports both >> >> "hello" "hello" >> #+end_src #+end_src >> >> >> #+results: dtrn >> :RESULTS: #+begin_results dtrn >> >> hello hello >> :END: #+end_results >> --8<-------end--------->8--- --8<-------end--------->8--- > > What you prefer is a special block, which is not neutral during export > process. Of course, a "result" block type could be added to Org syntax, > but that would be redundant with drawers. Thanks for your comment on this. Yes, a special block is indeed what I'd prefer visually. And a "result" block type could be non-redundant with drawers if it was allowed to contain headlines and drawers .... ;-) But let's leave it there. As I said: I am quite fine with the drawers. Regards, Andreas
