Re: [O] [Out-of-Thread] Re: [RFC] Org syntax (draft)

[Rasmus]

Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> writes:

> The reason why the emphasis regexp components were made configurable
> in the first place is because when the feature was introduced, I had
> no idea what would work, and I redesigned this part several times
> over.  Emphasis is a very heuristic system, the character that are
> allowed before and after the markers are necessarily a compromise, and
> we will always find people for who the chosen selection will not work.
> That is why I would like to argue for keeping this part hackable, even
> if I agree that the official definition should be fixed.  Keeping this
> variable a customize variable invites changes also by people who do
> not really know what they are doing.  Turning it into a defvar or
> defconst and somewhere document how to hack around the restriction if
> you really need to sounds like a good solution for me.

To some extend I disagree, I think.  Well, a contrib library is of
course OK, but I think it's not the right way to go about it. . .

Would it be possible to make it easier to make 'custom' highlights?
In a previous thread a [cite:key] syntax was suggested.  Perhaps, a
better way for custom emphasis would be [type:value] allowing for
custom functions for each type.  E.g. [TYPE:value] would run function
a function org-type-keys-TYPE which returns value formatted with a
special face.

Perhaps this is more cumbersome and perhaps it is no more 'structured'
than using customized emphases.

–Rasmus

-- 
El Rey ha muerto. ¡Larga vida al Rey!