Re: Changed list indentation behavior: how to revert?

[Tim Cross]

Greg Minshall <minshall@umich.edu> writes:

> hi, all.
>
> David Rogers <davidandrewrogers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Am I crazy to say that your last example of unwanted behavior is
>> easier for me to read and understand? (and to me the common
>> indenting is a hopeless mess?)
>
> yes, in fact, the "new" way sort of has the buffer indentation match
> that of the outline structure of the file (specified by asterisks).
> there's a lot to be said for that.  (though, obviously, it's not what
> everyone would want.)
>
> if the new mode stays as the standard, maybe we'd want to capture an
> asterisk typed immediately after a newline that would (by default), put
> that line-beginning asterisk back in column one?
>

I think this would be a great improvement. It is probably more comon
that that when you type an asterisk as the first character in the line
you want it to be a header and therefore, in the first column. On rare
occasions when you do want an asterisk at the beginning of the line, you
can indent it manually.

> otherwise, this is what one gets (without remembering to do a C-j
> instead of <RET>):
> -----
> * i wanted a headline<RET>
>   * i wanted a subhead, but it's ignored by org mode
> -----
> which is maybe not optimal?
>
> in most non-org modes (including in Org Src... buffers, and in org files
> when writing org-mode lists), i'm a big fan of electric indent mode.
>
> maybe an org-specific setting, "org-file-indent-follows-structure"?  if
> true, it means the user wants to have a "raw" org document laid out
> according to the outline structure of the document.  if false, it means
> one, in general, wants the org file laid out with left-alignment (or,
> right, in right-to-left) languages (not including embedded lists, and
> whatever else i might be ignoring).
>

Seems like a reasonable approach to me.


--
Tim Cross