From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Wales Subject: Re: outline-agenda sorting consistency Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 21:09:20 -0700 Message-ID: <20524da70903022009m618d7ef2u4c85a1fa5de55bea@mail.gmail.com> References: <20524da70902102136m43cc7206q88d9f992cd280bfe@mail.gmail.com> <12A93522-C936-4A08-AE29-3CE19A6B29CB@uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LeLwZ-00060h-BO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:09:23 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LeLwY-0005zV-Gd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:09:22 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37989 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LeLwY-0005zR-As for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:09:22 -0500 Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com ([74.125.78.147]:17068) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LeLwX-0005Uk-NL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:09:22 -0500 Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 4so452415eyg.24 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 20:09:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <12A93522-C936-4A08-AE29-3CE19A6B29CB@uva.nl> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Carsten, On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:22, Carsten Dominik wrote: >> 1) priority faces are settable in the agenda. perhaps >> they could be so in the outline also. > > This seems more confusing than useful to me. In the agenda, > all the tasks are together, so it does make some sense to > change fonts. In the outline, I would find it confusing. > Are there any other opinions on this? I'll try to provide more detail for at least my case. I would not set the face for the whole headline, just the priority tag itself. I actually find the agenda faces, which often set the entire headline, to be confusing.[1] I would not propose to change the default. For me [#C] and [#A] look alike and it is hard to distinguish them based on the single letter. I basically stopped using C because I kept (mis)perceiving it as important. (I don't use B because it is the same as blank.) What I would do is set C to show in something like (but not the same as) the done todo kw face, and A to show in something like the todo face. This tells me to pay attention less and more, respectively. Others would semioticize (so to speak) differently. >> 2) sorting strategy is settable in the agenda. perhaps it >> could be settable in the outline also. they could >> share code. > > To be honest, I never sort the outline, except in rare cases. > I would be interested how people use this to get a better case > for changing this. I would use it to keep high urgency and -priority tasks at the top and done tasks at the bottom. Also, I sometimes have a large list of disorganized tasks. The tasks need todo state specification, tagging, priority setting, refiling, turning into a plain list, etc.; and sorting seems the best way to focus the organizing. I can only do a little at a time, and can't predict when I can do it, so having it sorted allows me to immediately see gaps. Like "this is too urgent to be among the non-urgent tasks". Then I can return to it later without having to refamiliarize myself with the whole list. I can more easily isolate the high priority and high urgency stuff that isn't done, then organize only that. After dealing with metadata, I can make the hierarchy deeper by ontology. Having it work like org-agenda-sorting-strategy would allow the same sorting in both places. Here is how I might do it, were the facility to exist: - done-ish and unimportant stuff at the bottom, important stuff at the top, and uncategorized nodes (i.e. blank todo state, no priority, no urgency) in the middle. - alphabetical order for nodes with the same weight - to calculate the weight of a node: 1) priority a is worth +1000 2) urgent tag gets +1000 3) now tag gets +500 4) todo-ish states (todo, next) get +100 5) /blank todo state/ gets 0 6) zombie states (wait etc.) get -100 7) someday tag gets -500 8) priority c gets -1000 9) done-ish states (done, moot) get -3000 - example: an urgent todo would have a weight of 1100. when it is marked done, it would have a weight of -2000. This is especially useful for long confusing lists. > One of the basic principles in Org is that in the notes files, > tasks are in context. In the agenda, things are re-arranged > and sorted. That is why there is a complex sorting strategy > in the agenda, but not in the outline. The agenda is wonderful for other stuff, but for me it is not an editing mode per se. I have never been able to use the agenda for full control over the org file, as some people are able to do. For me (at least on my computer) it is slow. Arbitrary editing is not possible. The keys that work are often different from the ones I use in the outline. If I define a key in the outline, I have to figure out how to define it in the agenda (haven't yet). I find manipulating windows to be cumbersome, especially since for accessibility reasons I have no option but to use very large fonts that make split windows show very few lines (I typically never split windows). I usually can't see all the tags in the agenda because there are not enough columns. I can't scroll the other window in follow mode. Extra keystrokes are required to organize things. I can't easily create an arbitrary outline view of all tasks under a node with it. I can't rearrange and sort as I would in the outline. So for me, while the agenda is indispensable, it is only for showing an agenda view and occasionally jumping to a place. Not for arbitrary sorting and organizing. Just a different perspective / user experience. I hope it's useful in some way at least. [1] Especially since some elements get recolored (refaced) from the way they are in the outline. e.g. done todo kw showing up as todo face or tags being recolored. Might be bugs or might be overloading (because there is deadline and scheduled information being added to the information that is already in the headline). A possible solution is to reface just the category, or to have a single column for status, or something like that. I haven't thought about it deeply enough to comment further.