Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Nick and Eric,

Nick Dokos wrote:
> Eric Schulte <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Nick Dokos <address@hidden> writes:
>> > Eric Schulte <address@hidden> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have just pushed up a change to the Org-mode git repository which
>> >> removes support for #+BABEL lines.  Please use the more general
>> >> #+PROPERTIES lines instead.
>> >
>> > Coming late to the dance - sorry. I think that's very confusing.
>> > "Property" is an overloaded term in org: we now have the :PROPERTIES:
>> > drawer, the #+PROPERTY line and the #+PROPERTIES line (singular and
>> > plural forms are already pretty bad).

If you'd have asked me, I would have chosen #+BABEL instead of #+PROPERTIES,
as it made it clear "who" owned those directives, to whom they were targeted.

>> Do the #+PROPERTY and #+PROPERTIES lines have different semantics?
>
> I think so: see section 7.1 for a use of the former. AFAICT, the latter
> only applies to code block header arguments.
>
>> > Also, there is the general concept of properties (the stuff that the
>> > property API applies to).
>> >
>> > Unless there is an underlying unity of which I'm unaware, I'd strongly
>> > suggest another term - perhaps CODE_BLOCK_HEADER_ARGUMENTS (plus
>> > an easy-template for easy insertion). 
>> 
>> Code blocks already piggy-back off of subtree properties pulling their
>> header arguments out of the properties specified on the subtree level.
>> Given that header arguments and properties are already thus interleaved
>> I believe that properties should be used on the file-wide level as well,
>> rather than introducing another synonymous keyword which adds no new
>> functionality.
>> 
>> Does that make sense?

However, I've been convinced by Eric's arguments. The fact you already can mix
BABEL properties in subtree PROPERTIES...

> Yes, but the #+PROPERTIES line has nothing to do with org properties. It
> *only* affects code blocks, no?

But, I guess you're right, Nick: not the other way around.

So, I don't know anymore what to think...

I do well agree that "properties" has not a clear-cut meaning anymore; this is
a very general word.

Now, if I had to choose between #+PROPERTY and #+PROPERTIES, I would favor the
last one, as it is some place where you can stuff many properties -- and to
reflect what's already use for the export options: there you put the "options"
under the OPTIONS "meta-keyword". In the plural form.

Just my 2 cents. Whatever your choice, I'll follow it. And I always prefer to
reduce the number of synonyms, and have just one official form[1].

Best regards,
  Seb

Footnotes:

[1] I have the same "annoying" feelings with #+SOURCE, #+SRCNAME, #+FUNCTION,
#+CALL, #+LOB, and SBE, some of which are interchangeable; some not. I'd prefer
deprecating an old form when a better one is found.

-- 
Sebastien Vauban