Re: [O] [RFC] Standardized code block keywords

[Sebastien Vauban]

Hi Daniel,

Daniel Bausch wrote:
> Am Dienstag 25 Oktober 2011, 03:30:46 schrieb Eric Schulte:
>> "Sebastien Vauban" <address@hidden> writes:
>> > Daniel Bausch wrote:
>> >>>          named code blocks [1] -- "source" "srcname" "function"
>>>>> 
>>>>> calling external functions [2] -- "call" "lob"
>>>>> 
>>>>>                 named data [3] -- "tblname" "resname" "results" "data"
>>>> 
>>>> what about "#+name:" for [1] and [3], and "#+call:" for [2] ?
>>>> 
>>>> That a table or list contains data is obvious.  The only thing, the
>>>> additional line is for, is to "name" it.
>>> 
>>> As Eric showed us, this is not always to name it... If the table is the
>>> results of an unamed block, you will have #+name: followed by no name!
>>> 
>>> #+name:
>>> | line 1 | data1 |
>>> | line 2 | data2 |
>>> 
>>> what I also find quite disturbing.
>> 
>> I also find this to be disconcerting. -- Eric
>
> Then maybe #+results for (anonymous) results only, but #+name for anything
> else from [1] and [3].

Just wanted to say I like the idea of keeping "results" for (at least) output
of an anonymous call.

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban