4 ms·

Org-mode is awesome. But only in the context of Emacs. Markdown is less capable, but almost ubiquitous. I went from org-mode[^0] to markdown some years ago, and

Org-mode is awesome. But only in the context of Emacs. Markdown is less capable, but almost ubiquitous. I went from org-mode[^0] to markdown some years ago, and the only thing I am missing is org-tables. Currently I am using a set of markdown editors: Ulysses[^1], Typora, iA Writer and a few others. That makes me interface agnostic. The most important thing is the content, the (markdown)text I am producing. I can't say that about text in org-mode. It's tied to Emacs. (Edit:) In Ulysses I started using an annotation system myself, that's why this project here caught my attention. I am experimenting with brackets, double brackets, colons, double colons. Still in the process of experimenting. --- [^0]: was using org-mode to write documentation, journal entries, and as a task management system [^1]: Ulysses is way more than an editor. It is like Evernote with markdown targeting authors. It‘s my ‚Zettelkasten‘

robla 6y ago
> Org-mode is awesome. But only in the context of Emacs. Really? I agree with [Karl Voit 2017 essay](https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/ https://karl-voit.at/2017/09/23/orgmode-as-markup-only/) regarding that. To quote: > You can type Org mode in vim, notepad.exe, Atom, Notepad++, and all other text editors out there. And in my opinion it does have advantages compared to the other, common lightweight markup standards such as Markdown, AsciiDoc, Wikitext or reStructuredText. Voit then provides a very compelling case for why Org-mode syntax is a well-designed [lightweight markup language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweight_markup_language https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightweight_markup_language), and works well outside of Emacs.