It confuses me to understand if this is advocating org-mode or "an org-mode aiding tool".
But think again, if it's a good plaintext markup language, why would we concern about an editor anyway?
TBH the time it's being useful is when I am writing in _any_ plaintext editor. Not a great example but if I'm already used to pressing Ctrl + B for the past twenty years, why would Shift + _ suddenly make things better?
> if it's a good plaintext markup language, why would we concern about an editor anyway?
I work with a colleague who edits Org mode files in Vim just fine. But if you use Emacs to edit the same file, you get the benefits of subtree folding, syntax highlighting, etc.
You can get the same in Vim too, but someone has to develop a plugin for that.
So talking about my colleague editing Org mode in Vim, once he is done editing, he runs a Makefile that runs emacs in batch mode to run the Org exporter.
> TBH the time it's being useful is when I am writing in _any_ plaintext editor.
You still can, as I mentioned above.
The benefit of plain text is that it can be easily edited in any editor. Now emacs just adds features related to viewing (folding, syntax highlighting) and navigating on top of that. Given time and enough interest, any editor can support those features for Org mode files.
But think again, if it's a good plaintext markup language, why would we concern about an editor anyway?
TBH the time it's being useful is when I am writing in _any_ plaintext editor. Not a great example but if I'm already used to pressing Ctrl + B for the past twenty years, why would Shift + _ suddenly make things better?