13 ms·

I love org-mode as a format and as a literate / notebook programming environment. And I love emacs. But, I think it’s great that more people are looking at org

I love org-mode as a format and as a literate / notebook programming environment. And I love emacs. But, I think it’s great that more people are looking at org-mode outside emacs. I’d love to see alternative tool chains that push the capabilities and open more people to its magic.

bluejekyll 8y ago
As someone who only reads about the love of Org, could you breakdown what features you see as improvements over markdown, specially CommonMark? I often see Org and OrgMode conflated, where OrgMode seems to provide much more of an experience with the way Emacs has integrated it into the editor. Could markdown be as integrated and provide similar experience?
- jsilence 8y ago
  Org offers much more functionality than MD. Tags, TODOs with start dates and deadlines, an agenda view, capture templates, and a jupyter like notebook format with org-babel that allows for selectively integrating live code snippets into org documents. Been using it for >2 years now and for sure only using a fraction of its capacity.
- dan-robertson 8y ago
  I think not having to balance headline length with underline length is a good plus. Also not having to memorise the hierarchy of underline characters is a good plus. The format seems better suited to extension too with ways to have annotations or blocks
  - Stratoscope 8y ago
    You can do headings in Markdown like org mode, just use # instead of *: # Level 1 ## Level 2 ### Level 3 #### Level 4 etc. I rarely see the fiddly format in the wild, probably for the reasons you mentioned, and because it only allows H1 and H2: Level 1 ======= Level 2 ------- Of course there are lots of things org mode does better than Markdown, I'm just addressing the specific point you mentioned.
- juki 8y ago
  The big difference between Markdown and the Org-markup is that the latter has syntax for various kinds of metadata, while Markdown is purely content. That metadata is used for things like task management, literate programming, spreadsheets, customizing export behavior, etc. One could, in theory, create an extended Markdown flavor that allows similar metadata, but that wouldn't be compatible with any existing tools anyway, so there's not much point.
  - indentit 8y ago
    Pretty sure Markdown with metadata (sometimes referred to as "front matter") already exists and is called MultiMarkdown, no?
    - juki 8y ago
      By "various kinds of metadata", I don't just mean the document metadata (such as title, author, etc.), but also the metadata applied to specific elements such as the outline items, tables or code blocks. For example, in Org you can add task management data, scheduling information and arbitrary properties to the outline, #+COLUMNS: %ITEM %TODO %ASSIGNED_TO %SCHEDULED %PRIORITY #+PROPERTY: ASSIGNED_TO_ALL juki some other people * TODO [#A] Some task with priority A SCHEDULED: <2019-04-20> :PROPERTIES: :ASSIGNED_TO: juki :END: Some description. This defines a task with a custom property `ASSIGNED_TO` whose value can be one of ["juki", "some", "other", "people"], which can be viewed and edited in a column view. It could also be used by a custom export-backend or some other tool. For another example, you can add formulas to a table, #+CAPTION: A table with formulas. | foo | bar | Row sum | |-----+-----+---------| | 10 | 20 | 30 | | 30 | 40 | 70 | |-----+-----+---------| | 40 | 60 | 100 | #+TBLFM: $3=vsum($1..$2)::@4=vsum(@I..@II) Here the 10, 20, 30, 40 are added manually and the other cells are calculated by the sum-formulas. Since the results are inserted into the table, other tools can just skip over the TBLFM-metadata if they don't support it.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  The four differences between .org and CommonMark I could spot right now is that the latter lacks metadata[0], macros[1], syntax for specifying language for inline code blocks[2], and for tables[3]. It's hard to separate .org the markup language from org-mode the application, because quite a lot of its syntax is driven by application features. TODO markers, time stamps, schedule/deadline markers, property drawers, log books, tags - all of these are part of Org Mode functionality, but have little use if you're just trying to write a document for export. -- [0] - There's ton of stuff you could optionally add with #+SOMETHING: lines - local configuration of how to work with the file, metadata, exporter settings for any format individually and all of them together, and more. A lot of those can also be specified per-headline. [1] - https://orgmode.org/manual/Macro-replacement.html; https://orgmode.org/manual/Macro-replacement.html; crazy, but when it's needed, it works wonders. [2] - You can make Markdown-style code spans in Org Mode ~like this~, but there's actually a syntax for proper inline source code blocks that's much less known: src_lang{code}, or src_lang[header-args]{code}. For example, src_lisp{(+ 2 2)} or src_lisp[:results output]{(format t "Foobar")}. The reason for the header-args variant is that Org Mode inline code blocks can be executed interactively or on export, just like regular code blocks. See: https://orgmode.org/manual/Structure-of-code-blocks.html https://orgmode.org/manual/Structure-of-code-blocks.html for details on both. [3] - In CommonMark you could technically abuse HTML for that, but Org Mode provides the most readable format for tables... that's also the most convenient to write if you're using Org Mode, and an absolute PITA if you're not. See: https://orgmode.org/manual/Tables.html https://orgmode.org/manual/Tables.html.
  - indentit 8y ago
    I guess these days it is better to compare GitHub Formatted Markdown, a common extension to CommonMark, as opposed to plain CommonMark. It supports code blocks with language hints, tables etc. Also, I am pretty sure Markdown with metadata (sometimes referred to as "front matter") already exists and is called MultiMarkdown, though presumably not as powerful/useful as what you describe here.
    - gnomewascool 8y ago
      > code blocks with language hints CommonMark also supports code blocks with language hints (using the ```lang... syntax). What Org-mode has, in addition to code blocks with language hints, is inline code with language hints, which neither CommonMark nor GFM support. > tables I'm horrified that, indeed, CommonMark doesn't have tables, though you're right that most people now just use GFM.
- conquistadog 8y ago
  Org is just a shorthand as far as I know. Emacs Org-Mode works with files typically ending in ".org". I prefer to avoid the confusion by saying "Org-Mode" and "Org-Mode files" fully (and, I believe, properly).
- harrygeez 8y ago
  So they way I see it, `org` file format and `org-mode` are 2 different things. On surface level, `org` files don't bring carry many significant advantages over similar formats like Markdown; rather, it's Emacs's `org-mode` that brings this text file to life. You can have a full-fledged calendar and scheduling system just in a few lines of text. Imagine that.
phaer 8y ago
It's great to have more options, but people might be interested in the org-mode support of pandoc: https://pandoc.org/org.html https://pandoc.org/org.html This enables .e.g. transformation of org-mode files with latex templates, to html slides or even into .odt files and customization via filters over pandocs AST. These filters can be not only written in haskell but in pretty much any language.
- mruts 8y ago
  I use pandoc + org-mode and it’s perfect. I love being able to convert my notes to LaTeX while correctly handling the inline images and math.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    What's the reason to use Pandoc to convert .org files to LaTeX instead of the built-in Org Mode LaTeX exporter? Serious question - I do plenty of .org -> LaTeX like this, and never tried the Pandoc route before.
    - branweb 8y ago
      I don't think there is one, other than personal preference. It's really useful for going the other way though: <some format e.g. html> -> org.
    - mruts 8y ago
      For some reason, emacs to pdf or latex errors out for some .sty file being missing. I could probably fix it, but pandoc works out of the box so I guess I’ll be sticking with it.
    - snicker7 8y ago
      Org to PDF via Emacs works great. The main issue is making Emacs a hard dependency of your publishing pipeline.
      - TeMPOraL 8y ago

bluejekyll 8y ago

As someone who only reads about the love of Org, could you breakdown what features you see as improvements over markdown, specially CommonMark? I often see Org and OrgMode conflated, where OrgMode seems to provide much more of an experience with the way Emacs has integrated it into the editor. Could markdown be as integrated and provide similar experience?

jsilence 8y ago
Org offers much more functionality than MD. Tags, TODOs with start dates and deadlines, an agenda view, capture templates, and a jupyter like notebook format with org-babel that allows for selectively integrating live code snippets into org documents. Been using it for >2 years now and for sure only using a fraction of its capacity.
dan-robertson 8y ago
I think not having to balance headline length with underline length is a good plus. Also not having to memorise the hierarchy of underline characters is a good plus. The format seems better suited to extension too with ways to have annotations or blocks
- Stratoscope 8y ago
  You can do headings in Markdown like org mode, just use # instead of *: # Level 1 ## Level 2 ### Level 3 #### Level 4 etc. I rarely see the fiddly format in the wild, probably for the reasons you mentioned, and because it only allows H1 and H2: Level 1 ======= Level 2 ------- Of course there are lots of things org mode does better than Markdown, I'm just addressing the specific point you mentioned.
juki 8y ago
The big difference between Markdown and the Org-markup is that the latter has syntax for various kinds of metadata, while Markdown is purely content. That metadata is used for things like task management, literate programming, spreadsheets, customizing export behavior, etc. One could, in theory, create an extended Markdown flavor that allows similar metadata, but that wouldn't be compatible with any existing tools anyway, so there's not much point.
- indentit 8y ago
  Pretty sure Markdown with metadata (sometimes referred to as "front matter") already exists and is called MultiMarkdown, no?
  - juki 8y ago
    By "various kinds of metadata", I don't just mean the document metadata (such as title, author, etc.), but also the metadata applied to specific elements such as the outline items, tables or code blocks. For example, in Org you can add task management data, scheduling information and arbitrary properties to the outline, #+COLUMNS: %ITEM %TODO %ASSIGNED_TO %SCHEDULED %PRIORITY #+PROPERTY: ASSIGNED_TO_ALL juki some other people * TODO [#A] Some task with priority A SCHEDULED: <2019-04-20> :PROPERTIES: :ASSIGNED_TO: juki :END: Some description. This defines a task with a custom property `ASSIGNED_TO` whose value can be one of ["juki", "some", "other", "people"], which can be viewed and edited in a column view. It could also be used by a custom export-backend or some other tool. For another example, you can add formulas to a table, #+CAPTION: A table with formulas. | foo | bar | Row sum | |-----+-----+---------| | 10 | 20 | 30 | | 30 | 40 | 70 | |-----+-----+---------| | 40 | 60 | 100 | #+TBLFM: $3=vsum($1..$2)::@4=vsum(@I..@II) Here the 10, 20, 30, 40 are added manually and the other cells are calculated by the sum-formulas. Since the results are inserted into the table, other tools can just skip over the TBLFM-metadata if they don't support it.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
The four differences between .org and CommonMark I could spot right now is that the latter lacks metadata[0], macros[1], syntax for specifying language for inline code blocks[2], and for tables[3]. It's hard to separate .org the markup language from org-mode the application, because quite a lot of its syntax is driven by application features. TODO markers, time stamps, schedule/deadline markers, property drawers, log books, tags - all of these are part of Org Mode functionality, but have little use if you're just trying to write a document for export. -- [0] - There's ton of stuff you could optionally add with #+SOMETHING: lines - local configuration of how to work with the file, metadata, exporter settings for any format individually and all of them together, and more. A lot of those can also be specified per-headline. [1] - https://orgmode.org/manual/Macro-replacement.html; https://orgmode.org/manual/Macro-replacement.html; crazy, but when it's needed, it works wonders. [2] - You can make Markdown-style code spans in Org Mode ~like this~, but there's actually a syntax for proper inline source code blocks that's much less known: src_lang{code}, or src_lang[header-args]{code}. For example, src_lisp{(+ 2 2)} or src_lisp[:results output]{(format t "Foobar")}. The reason for the header-args variant is that Org Mode inline code blocks can be executed interactively or on export, just like regular code blocks. See: https://orgmode.org/manual/Structure-of-code-blocks.html https://orgmode.org/manual/Structure-of-code-blocks.html for details on both. [3] - In CommonMark you could technically abuse HTML for that, but Org Mode provides the most readable format for tables... that's also the most convenient to write if you're using Org Mode, and an absolute PITA if you're not. See: https://orgmode.org/manual/Tables.html https://orgmode.org/manual/Tables.html.
- indentit 8y ago
  I guess these days it is better to compare GitHub Formatted Markdown, a common extension to CommonMark, as opposed to plain CommonMark. It supports code blocks with language hints, tables etc. Also, I am pretty sure Markdown with metadata (sometimes referred to as "front matter") already exists and is called MultiMarkdown, though presumably not as powerful/useful as what you describe here.
  - gnomewascool 8y ago
    > code blocks with language hints CommonMark also supports code blocks with language hints (using the ```lang... syntax). What Org-mode has, in addition to code blocks with language hints, is inline code with language hints, which neither CommonMark nor GFM support. > tables I'm horrified that, indeed, CommonMark doesn't have tables, though you're right that most people now just use GFM.
conquistadog 8y ago
Org is just a shorthand as far as I know. Emacs Org-Mode works with files typically ending in ".org". I prefer to avoid the confusion by saying "Org-Mode" and "Org-Mode files" fully (and, I believe, properly).
harrygeez 8y ago
So they way I see it, `org` file format and `org-mode` are 2 different things. On surface level, `org` files don't bring carry many significant advantages over similar formats like Markdown; rather, it's Emacs's `org-mode` that brings this text file to life. You can have a full-fledged calendar and scheduling system just in a few lines of text. Imagine that.

phaer 8y ago

It's great to have more options, but people might be interested in the org-mode support of pandoc: https://pandoc.org/org.html https://pandoc.org/org.html This enables .e.g. transformation of org-mode files with latex templates, to html slides or even into .odt files and customization via filters over pandocs AST. These filters can be not only written in haskell but in pretty much any language.

mruts 8y ago
I use pandoc + org-mode and it’s perfect. I love being able to convert my notes to LaTeX while correctly handling the inline images and math.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  What's the reason to use Pandoc to convert .org files to LaTeX instead of the built-in Org Mode LaTeX exporter? Serious question - I do plenty of .org -> LaTeX like this, and never tried the Pandoc route before.
  - branweb 8y ago
    I don't think there is one, other than personal preference. It's really useful for going the other way though: <some format e.g. html> -> org.
  - mruts 8y ago
    For some reason, emacs to pdf or latex errors out for some .sty file being missing. I could probably fix it, but pandoc works out of the box so I guess I’ll be sticking with it.
  - snicker7 8y ago
    Org to PDF via Emacs works great. The main issue is making Emacs a hard dependency of your publishing pipeline.
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago