[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords
From: |
Eric Schulte |
Subject: |
Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:12:14 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) |
>> I'm confused by [3] so I will say nothing for now, except to ask some
>> questions: are we talking about what a human would use to label a piece
>> of data for consumption by a block (including perhaps the future
>> possibilities of lists and paragraphs that Tom brought up)? what babel
>> would use to label a results block (possibly so that it could be
>> consumed by another block in a chain)? both? would that mean
>> that #+tblname would go the way of the dodo and that tables would be
>> labelled with #+data (or #+object or whatever else we come up with)?
>
> +1 (Confused, too)
>
well, I guess it is good that this discussion has begun if only to clear
up this lingering uncertainty.
>
> I wasn't even aware of #+DATA. Does it do anything TBLNAME and SRCNAME
> don't?
>
from the prospective of code blocks it is exactly synonymous with
tblname. Srcname is different in that it labels code blocks.
>
> A reason to keep TBLNAME is that it's also used by the spreadsheet
> remote references. If Babel looked for DATA instead, a table that is
> both a remote reference for another spreadsheet and a data source for
> a src block would need both TBLNAME and DATA, which seems redundant.
>
agreed, I'm thinking that tblname will at least remain an option no
matter what decision is made.
>
> As for labeling lists and paragraphs, I recall from the list that
> Nicolas Goaziou is working on a generalized way to set captions,
> labels and attributes for various kinds of Org block, as is possible
> now for tables and images. I thought that sounded promising. I don't
> know if he planned for block names, too (currently we have tblname but
> no imgname), but that could make sense. In which case it might be a
> good idea to coordinate.
>
Agreed, I was not aware of this work. Thanks for sharing. In this vein
I would like to voice my desire to be able to add captions to code
blocks, the lack of this feature has bitten me in the past.
--
Eric Schulte
http://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte/
- [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines, Nick Dokos, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines, Nick Dokos, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines, Sebastien Vauban, 2011/10/20
- [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Thomas S. Dye, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Nick Dokos, 2011/10/20
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Christian Moe, 2011/10/21
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords,
Eric Schulte <=
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Thomas S. Dye, 2011/10/21
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Daniel Bausch, 2011/10/23
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Thomas S. Dye, 2011/10/23
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Daniel Bausch, 2011/10/24
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Sebastien Vauban, 2011/10/21
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/21
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Sebastien Vauban, 2011/10/21
- Message not available
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Rainer M Krug, 2011/10/25
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/21
- Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords, Eric Schulte, 2011/10/21