On 2019-12-02, at 08:23, Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
>
>> [...]
>> What do you think about the attached patch that allows to omit the
>> @-syntax? Controlled by the new variable
>> org-list-use-first-bullet-as-non-standard-counter, the code assigns
>> a counter value to
On 2019-12-01, at 14:13, Samuel Wales wrote:
> i think it might be partlly a question of whether these numbers are
> fixed things that refer to fixed items [like referring to sections in
> a law that is not in the document] vs. being used to continue lists.
>
> they are both legitimate uses. in t
Hello,
Jens Lechtenboerger writes:
> currently, we have to write the following to continue an ordered
> list from a value different from 1:
>
> 42. [@42] Answer
> 43. Question?
>
> The requirement to type redundant information with the @-syntax
> always struck me as odd. For my export backend o
[note: id markers use org ids.]
On 12/1/19, Samuel Wales wrote:
> i think it might be partlly a question of whether these numbers are
> fixed things that refer to fixed items [like referring to sections in
> a law that is not in the document] vs. being used to continue lists.
>
> they are both le
i think it might be partlly a question of whether these numbers are
fixed things that refer to fixed items [like referring to sections in
a law that is not in the document] vs. being used to continue lists.
they are both legitimate uses. in the first case, the @ syntax makes
sense to me, because
