Re: [O] [ANN] BREAKING CHANGE -- removing #+BABEL file-wide property lines

[Christian Moe]

Whoa -- before this gets more confusing:

Eric, did you push up a (new, or at least so far undocumented in the 
manual) syntax involving a #+PROPERTIES line, as Nick and Sebastien 
seem to understand you?

Or was #+PROPERTIES just a typo, and you mean using the #+PROPERTY 
line or :PROPERTIES: drawer, as provided in the manual?

Yours,
Christian

(lamenting the demise of the #+BABEL header I'd just recently started 
to use)



On 10/20/11 10:12 PM, Eric Schulte wrote:
> Nick Dokos<address@hidden>  writes:
>
> > Eric Schulte<address@hidden>  wrote:
> >
> > > I have just pushed up a change to the Org-mode git repository which
> > > removes support for #+BABEL lines.  Please use the more general
> > > #+PROPERTIES lines instead.
> >
> > Coming late to the dance - sorry. I think that's very confusing.
> > "Property" is an overloaded term in org: we now have the :PROPERTIES:
> > drawer, the #+PROPERTY line and the #+PROPERTIES line (singular and
> > plural forms are already pretty bad).
>
> Do the #+PROPERTY and #+PROPERTIES lines have different semantics?
>
> > Also, there is the general concept of properties (the stuff that the
> > property API applies to).
> >
> > Unless there is an underlying unity of which I'm unaware, I'd strongly
> > suggest another term - perhaps CODE_BLOCK_HEADER_ARGUMENTS (plus
> > an easy-template for easy insertion).
>
> Code blocks already piggy-back off of subtree properties pulling their
> header arguments out of the properties specified on the subtree level.
> Given that header arguments and properties are already thus interleaved
> I believe that properties should be used on the file-wide level as well,
> rather than introducing another synonymous keyword which adds no new
> functionality.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Best -- Eric