← Back to context

Comment by sp33der89

12 hours ago

I hope org-mode gets more popular outside of Emacs. I know all the words already about how org-mode is great because of Emacs, but the way you can do plaintext outlining, with great support for TODO's, in org-mode is fantastic. It retains a lot of readability, and that isn't Emacs specific: there are things that make org-mode great as-is!

A small todo application for mobile that uses org-mode as the database doesn't need to parse fancy org-babel stuff, except maybe that org-mode itself can be hard to parse.

Personally I'm hopeful that org-mode gets some more love outside of Emacs, so here's a list of interesting org-mode projects that aren't pandoc or Emacs related:

- https://github.com/RWejlgaard/org - https://nvim-orgmode.github.io/ - https://github.com/haxscramper/haxorg - github.com/cnglen/windancer - https://braintool.org/

But the fancy org-babel stuff is 90% of the reason I use org -- and that's only on Emacs as far as I know.

That won't change until top-notch, simple (i.e., without 100 transient dependencies) org parsing and formatting libraries for a few key languages (go, javascript / typescript, and python; maybe also C++ and java) become available.

Which is sad because org-mode seems far more versatile than markdown, except for a couple of ergonomic features (e.g., ``` vs #+BEGIN_SRC, and * [x] task vs * DONE task).

Even libraries to parse and format a subset of org-mode would be good enablers.

  • I think it gets away with being more verbose because those two aren't spelled "#+BEGIN_SRC" and "DONE", they're "C-c , q" and "C-c t d" (from memory). I think unless you really commit to learning a decent subset of what org-mode provides the ergonomics are always going to seem a little clumsy. I've always found emacs shortcuts hard to learn, and because of that I've never quite got my use of org-mode over the activation hump to really stick for the long term. Every time I leave it and come back to it I have to relearn a lot of it from scratch because there doesn't seem to be any sort of intuitive framework I can hang it all off.

    • I made my own macro* to encapsulate the currently selected text in SOURCE \END_SOURCE tags. Now you're telling me there was a keyboard shortcut for that?

      What else I don't know about emacs?

      *It was my first macro/function and while creating it I've learned that 1. It wasn't that hard and 2. With help of an LLM you can program emacs a little even without deep knowledge of elisp. Though LLMs suggest very unreadable elisp code and you have to rewrite everything.

org-mode would need an Obsidian-level polished application to become a thing. This is not that simple, I guess...

BTW obsidian borrowed a few ideas from org-mode, like clickable checkboxes, creating ad-hoc daily notes, etc.

I sort of bounce off of org over and over because I find it very unreadable. Compared to Markdown (I know Markdown isn't quite the same thing), org feels very crusty and noisy.

  • This totally depends on how you set up your org face attributes. I keep using Org because, for me, it's far more readable than Markdown.

    Also, it's always a tree. The three operations, like folding, traversal,. etc, are essential for me, and not available in Markdown.

    Fortunately, GitHub understands README.org files.

  • I actually pandoced my Markdown files to Org mode a few years ago because Org mode is easier to read in plain text editors. I especially like the use of dashes for lists. However, even in Emacs Org mode, I still use `backtick` fences in inline code.

  • While org mode can do almost anything, it is foremost an outliner, not a markup language like markdown. Using org-mode in place of Markdown is like using MS Word for coding, so no wonder