org-web-tools VS org-capture-extension

There is also org-web-tools which use pandoc to convert html to org-mode. You can use pandoc also in scripts.

There is also another great alphapapa package org-web-tools for those who only want org-mode format, or don’t use MacOS.

[org-web-tools] https://github.com/alphapapa/org-web-tools

You can use https://github.com/alphapapa/org-web-tools it can save a web pages as an org files and has some extra cool functionality.

Not sure what you mean by "filing cabinet." Org does have file attachments. See also https://github.com/alphapapa/org-web-tools for archiving Web pages with Org.

Also, not exactly related to your question, but you may find it useful: See https://github.com/alphapapa/org-web-tools, which also makes it easy to attach Web page archives.

Press c l to choose my commonplace-book link-capture template, which uses org-web-tools to insert an Org link with the Web page's title as the description:

org-capture is a browser extension in which you can select part of a website and add it to a org file entry.

org-capture : define templates to fill org files. I use it for todo lists, health journaling , ideas, etc. If I'm in a file and want to add a region of text to my todo list I just select the region press C-c c t give it a title, a deadline and it's done. Same for something I'm reading in firefox and want to save to the idea file (its need an extension)

Is there something wrong with org-capture extension? It does exactly what you say.

I would like to be able to use the extension ; https://github.com/sprig/org-capture-extension but I don't think it's possible, I like having the ability to select text and capture it directly in emacs.