Re: Differences between Org-Mode and Hyperbole

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

Because the various subfeatures of Org mode were designed inside Org mode,
they turn Org mode into a separate editor within Emacs.

  > Indeed.  Pragmatic approach.  It may be lacking in design, although much
  > has been rewritten over the years, more recently by Nicolas, but it
  > works and works very well.

It must be good to use, to have so many users.  But that's a different
issue.  These submodes should be designed so that they individually
fit into Emacs.

  > > That may be true, but I stand by what I said.
  > > It is fine to have a structured editing mode, but it was
  > > bad design to make other facilities depend on it in this way.

  > But it is the structure that provides the basis for those facilities?

Since I don't know Org mode, I don't know what you mean by this
statement.  "The basis" has various possible meanings and I can't tell
what you mean.

The reason I don't know Org mode is that I'd have to start by learning
basic Org mode, which I am not interested in, before I see what its
specific features are.  At that point, I gave up.

In any case, there are many Emacs facilities that use other Emacs
facilities and avoid causing this kind of problem.  I am sure
it would be possible to define a structure editing library package
and have various modes use it.  These modes would have a similarity,
but you would be able to learn any one of them on its own.

Indeed, if you learned two of them, you'd see a similarity, and that
similarity might be called "Orgmode".  Nothing wrong with that.
It would avoid the problem that Org mode has now.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation (gnu.org, fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (internethalloffame.org)
Skype: No way! See stallman.org/skype.html.