Re: Emacs as an Org LSP server

[Jean Louis]

* Russell Adams <RLAdams@AdamsInfoServ.Com> [2020-12-14 22:20]:
  :PROPERTIES:
  :CREATED:  [2020-12-14 Mon 23:18]
  :ID:       a24a5299-11e6-4ecf-a6c5-4622f0d6c28b
  :END:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:12:43AM +0800, TEC wrote:
> > > [ MS Taint ]
> >
> > I'm a stats student, so if you'll excuse the slightly odd perspective, I
> > see the chance of MS being dodgy as a bayesian process. Previous
> > knowledge creates an informed prior. It does not allow you to make
> > conclusions without examining each instance on a case-by-case basis,
> > only predictions. To do otherwise is to commit the genetic fallacy.
> 
> I don't credit MS as the source of the idea, only a supporter. So
> let's omit MS from the discussion and distill this down.
> 
> Emacs is a unique and amazing editor. Emacs has special features that
> enables truly remarkable data management and text editing in
> Org-mode. Other editors cannot or have not been able to replicate
> these features, or Emacs Org-mode would not be so uniquely
> desirable. Thus if users want to use Org-mode, they should use
> Emacs. It is freely available and like all worthwhile tools Emacs
> takes some time to learn.

There are now other editors using Org slowly slowly, not full. There
exists Org mode for Vim editor. Various Org based tools like Orgzly
for mobile devices have been developed.

https://github.com/jceb/vim-orgmode

Features like outline, TODO/DONE, properties, tags, and various dates
can be implemented by editor macros in other editors.  The very basic
functionality is open for any editor. Finally all those basic tags,
properties, dates can be as well written by hand. Macros are just
handy there.

There is Perl parser for Org:
https://metacpan.org/pod/Org::Parser

If there are parsing engines than most basic features can be
implemented in other editors. 

> If users and programmers for other editors want to try and replicate
> the success and features of Org in their editor, they are welcome to
> do so. However why should I want to actively contribute to that
> effort?

Maybe for compatibility and better collaboration. Observe the basic
structure as such can be definitely written by any editor. Macros
bound to keys can quickly switch TODO/DONE items, insert SCHEDULED,
DEADLINE by using external calendaring tools such as zenity or
question and answer principles, few variables if supported by editor
may hold various properties and tags to be chosen from.

** TODO Headline                                                  :topublish:
   SCHEDULED: <2020-12-14 Mon>
   :PROPERTIES:
   :DESCRIPTION: My first
   :CREATED:  [2020-12-14 Mon 23:18]
   :ID:       d93f73cf-c420-4d4b-b5c8-db53725e26e4
   :END:

Then searching for various properties, tags, TODO/DONE items becomes
easy in any editor. Command line greping or other types of search also
helps to find specific headlines. It need not be necessarily all Emacs
based.

It helps in collaboration. People using various editors can provide
Org type structure and submit their reports or contributions.

> So in summary, why should anyone contribute to exporting our unique
> features to other editors instead of investing that time making Emacs
> better?

When editing files on remote servers not always I have Emacs available
neither I can always install it (at least not as quick). But few handy
macros that one may fetch from WWW server can temporarily serve to
construct basic Org headlines.

Using Emacs on mobile devices is tedious. I do use it but normally
over SSH. Sometimes directly. It is not user friendly on mobile
devices. If there would be Android/LineageOS/Replicant OS editor that
supports macros, I could at least enter some notes with little
structured text for later. Just that I did not find editor with macros.

I use Emacs on mobile devices in console mode. Somebody made Emacs for
Android as GUI, but it is crushing.

In general, it should be useful from Org website to provide macros for
other editors that support macros, as that way more users may come to Emacs as 
well.

Jean