> Any tool that interprets Org-mode accepts this simple and easy to remember syntax. Sorry but this just isn't true. org-mode doesn't have the standardization

> Any tool that interprets Org-mode accepts this simple and easy to remember syntax. Sorry but this just isn't true. org-mode doesn't have the standardization problems Markdown does only because it's not as popular. As far as I know org-mode also doesn't have a standard, just an official implementation. And all the unofficial implementations suffer from bugs where they do something a little differently (https://github.com/bjonnh/PyOrgMode/issues/39 https://github.com/bjonnh/PyOrgMode/issues/39 , https://github.com/hsitz/VimOrganizer/issues/78 https://github.com/hsitz/VimOrganizer/issues/78 , plenty of others in every org-mode tool that doesn't just call Emacs). This isn't to malign any of the authors of these tools, but the reality is without an actual specification the problems are exactly the same as Markdown's - everyone is chasing subtle implementation details, not a clear goal. IMO, org-mode only makes sense in the context of editing within Emacs. The (enormous) value isn't in the file format, which doesn't really offer anything over GFM, but in the editing tool itself - which is difficult enough to realize inside of Emacs, let alone in any other editor - and its integration with other Emacs tools.