From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: org-archive-done Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 19:07:25 +0200 Message-ID: <4478265165446c7989d7c200430ffc0e@science.uva.nl> References: <874pyomawm.fsf@ibbu.nl> <4491EAC7.7080304@gmail.com> <44933E3A.9010100@gmail.com> <44946A6F.7020508@gmail.com> <94a84102394ede474f74017dc38b3f6b@science.uva.nl> <449507D6.3040703@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v624) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FsNDl-0006RQ-Vw for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:07:30 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FsNDj-0006OU-Ko for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:07:29 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FsNDj-0006OH-FA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:07:27 -0400 Received: from [194.134.35.149] (helo=smtp08.wanadoo.nl) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FsNO4-0005ub-EK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:18:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <449507D6.3040703@gmail.com> 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: "Daniel J. Sinder" Cc: emacs-orgmode I have a basic implementation of this. Would you like to pretest it a bit, to get the worst bugs out before I put this out? - Carsten On Jun 18, 2006, at 9:59, Daniel J. Sinder wrote: > Carsten Dominik wrote: >> On Jun 17, 2006, at 22:47, Daniel J. Sinder wrote: >>> I have just one final thought....and it's just a thought because I >>> don't understand how org-mode is implemented.... >>> What if, instead of archiving *moving* subtrees, it left them in >>> place but *hid* them in a semi-permanent way. By that I mean, >>> they'd be hidden just like the collapsing org-mode normally does, >>> but they would never expand, unless a special show-archived-subtrees >>> variable was non-nil. >> this is a very interesting and original idea! I really like it. It >> would mean that subitems that are done remain in place, but don't use >> space on the screen. I am not sure if I like the term "archiving" >> for this. "Locking" seems to be better. > > I'm glad you like this (and that it seems straightforward to > implement). My only questions is this: If locking is an alternative > (not replacement) to archiving, will locked items also be kept out of > agendas and exports, like when archiving? My vote would be "yes". > > Dan > > -- Carsten Dominik Sterrenkundig Instituut "Anton Pannekoek" Universiteit van Amsterdam Kruislaan 403 NL-1098SJ Amsterdam phone: +31 20 525 7477