org-parser VS org-web

Let me start by saying I like the goal and would like to see org mode accessible to everyone, but I do have some thoughts/reservations.

> For the little code I do write, I find having AI assistance (via CoPilot or Cody) to be tremendously helpful. So helpful, in fact, that I now tend to jump into VSCode for actual coding,

Aren't there both copilot and Cody plugins available in emacs?

> Use VSCode for everything. For me, this requires a full-featured org mode implementation. I currently feel stuck in Emacs just because of how great org mode is.

This seems much more difficult than creating plugins you need in emacs and with the downside that customization will be much worse in vscode, especially customization of behavior with things like hooks.

> Letting go of bug-for-bug compatibility with Emacs as a goal. Let's let the quirky behavior die off and move forward with a more cohesive program, even if it looks a little bit different.

If you don't have compatibility, then you aren't really implementing org-mode... you are starting fresh.

That's okay, but you'll likely annoy org-mode users and developers as documents ending in `.org` start not working the same.

Also there are languages besides Rust and Haskell that have an org parser implementation. For instance one written in Javascript already has a spec as you explain it and is used in production for organice[0]:

> Why is this project useful / Rationale

> Org mode in Emacs is implemented in org-element.el (API documentation). The spec for the Org syntax is written in prose. - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

> Portable. It should not be difficult to get this integrated into any editor.

This tells me you already have a language in mind such as Lua (can't think of any other easy to integrate languages)? I'd argue that's not very popular either though.

0: https://organice.200ok.ch/

I mean , you have parsers for JS and CLJS https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

I don't think you did. You probably used the sister project https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser which has a well known issue regarding what you are describing: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

organice has no such performance issues (and does not run on the JVM). I use it daily with 5k LOC files.

EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

From the readme:

> Org grammar for tree-sitter. It is not meant to implement emacs' orgmode parser, but to implement a grammar that can usefully parse org files to be used in neovim and any library that uses tree-sitter parsers.

This grammar is in active development and is being used by nvim-orgmode/orgmode [1], a org-mode neovim plugin.

Some additional resources some might find useful:

* Org Syntax - https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html

* EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[1] https://github.com/nvim-orgmode/orgmode

There's at least a parser using that as a spec at https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser

We have an issue with more information and we are working on it: https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/issues/56

If you’re open to use a different Lisp, then maybe https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser is something for you.

I just wanted to chime in and mention that the folks who wrote organice[0] also came up with an EBNF grammar[1] for org-mode. Also of tangential interest is that work is actively being done on creating a tree-sitter version[2] of the grammar, although that work is not public (yet).

[0] https://github.com/200ok-ch/organice

[1] https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...

[2] https://github.com/kristijanhusak/orgmode.nvim/issues/31#iss...

If you stick with Orgmode, what I used was https://org-web.org/ it's pretty great

Collaboration is indeed a weak point of Org. However, there are https://org-web.org/ and https://logseq.com/

> Also i dont care about a fancy looking UI that uses 8GB of RAM and takes 10 Seconds to load, just make it work.

Well, this is pretty much Google Docs or any Open Source clone like Nextcloud or LibreOffice Online I guess. It's surely possible though to write something like that with a very lean UI.

I think many Web developers go by default for something more complex though because it's not necessarily more effort. And well, there are already a bizillion similar apps.

> Also i dont care about a fancy looking UI that uses 8GB of RAM and takes 10 Seconds to load, just make it work.

But this one might be relatively close to what you're looking for: https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web (At least if you self-host, the web server of org-web.org doesn't seem very fast :))

I use this for shared org Todo lists: https://org-web.org/

There are also mobile apps like orgzly or plain-org. And one more link for online editors: https://org-web.org/. As the last resort, you may always go for Emacs on mobile. (There are currently even some discussions on emacs-devel about touchscreen support).

Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet, but Org-mode for Emacs [1] is just great, and fits very well to the requirements:

- Source of truth: these are text files, so any of git, nextcloud, syncthing etc. will do.

- Consistent interface: using emacs might be tough on mobile, but there are some web interfaces for Org mode [2]

- Standard protocols: custom scripting does anything. ical is pretty easy to handle, not sure about webdav.

- FOSS: check

- Multiple calendars: yep, via Org agenda [3]

- Subtask support: As deep as you can go

- Custom logic: via emacs scripts (or some creativity if you're using the web ui above)

- Markdown notes: yes, minimal differences between org mode and markdown

[1] https://orgmode.org/

[2] https://github.com/DanielDe/org-web

[3] https://orgmode.org/manual/Agenda-Views.html

Different options exist offering a differing amount of features. These include MobileOrg, Beorg, flat habits, OrgRO. Other solutions include Org Web, Organice.