From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rainer Stengele Subject: Re: bug? org does not seem to sort by prioritiy #A, #B, #C, #D Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:38:42 +0200 Message-ID: <4CC00A22.5020605@diplan.de> References: <5018244D-6882-44E3-BE5A-F7ADFD68CA78@gmail.com> <4CBFE7D9.7060406@diplan.de> <8149C452-8C07-4458-AE99-73717076A134@gmail.com> <4CBFEC31.5060008@diplan.de> <4CBFFF5D.2010604@diplan.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55924 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P8rbn-0002UJ-12 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:38:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8rbg-0005Qr-OS for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:38:46 -0400 Received: from ns.diplan.de ([212.34.188.4]:56744 helo=mail.diplan.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8rbg-0005QQ-AC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:38:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: 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 Am 21.10.2010 11:01, schrieb Carsten Dominik: > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: > >> Am 21.10.2010 09:39, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>> >>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>> >>>> Am 21.10.2010 09:21, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:12 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Am 21.10.2010 09:07, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> maybe this is a bug: (Org-mode version 7.01trans (release_7.01h.605.gc540) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Having set >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>>> Org Enable Priority Commands: Hide Value Toggle on (non-nil) >>>>>>>> State: STANDARD. >>>>>>>> Non-nil means priority commands are active. Hide Rest >>>>>>>> When nil, these commands will be disabled, so that you never accidentally >>>>>>>> set a priority. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Org Highest Priority: Hide Value A >>>>>>>> State: STANDARD. >>>>>>>> The highest priority of TODO items. A character like ?A, ?B etc. More >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Org Lowest Priority: Hide Value D >>>>>>>> State: SAVED and set. >>>>>>>> The lowest priority of TODO items. A character like ?A, ?B etc. More >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Org Default Priority: Hide Value D >>>>>>>> State: SAVED and set. >>>>>>>> The default priority of TODO items. More >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> resulting correctly in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (custom-set-variables >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> '(org-highest-priority 65) >>>>>>>> '(org-default-priority 68) >>>>>>>> '(org-lowest-priority 68) >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> ============================================================================== >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the custom agenda command >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ("Tp" "all todos sorted by prio" >>>>>>>> ( >>>>>>>> (alltodo "all todos" )) >>>>>>>> ((org-agenda-sorting-strategy '(priority-down)))) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> will sort correctly by priorities #A, #B, #C, descending, >>>>>>>> but will then mix up the rest of the todos with "#D" or without priority. >>>>>>>> "#D" does not seem to be included in the sorting. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The meaning of the default priority is that tasks without a priority do have >>>>>>> the default priority. If you need 4 priorities all higher than "normal tasks", >>>>>>> make E your lowest and default priority >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Carsten >>>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, works now. A bit counterintuitive, isn't it? >>>>> >>>>> What would be the "intuitive" meaning of default priority then? >>>>> >>>>> - Carsten >>>> Well, I would have expected that if I define a priority #D as lowest priority it is not excluded from sorting. >>> >>> >>> It *is* included in the sorting. All #D's come after the #A's, #B's, and #C's. Only that "all #D's" includes all entries that have no specified priority. Within each main priority, the precise order of the entries is determined by other >>> factors well, like if it is a deadline or an overdue scheduled item..... That make the D's look random and the other not - but the same is going on everywhere. >>> >>> You can look at the computed priority (which is used for sorting) by pressing (I think) "P" on every item. >>> >>> Would you like to make a proposal for a paragraph in the manual to clarify this? Or are you proposing to change how this works? >>> >>> >>> >>> - Carsten >>> >> My guessing is that a naive user (like me ...) does expect any defined priority (like #D in this case) to have a higher priority than a "non" priority item. > > I see how that makes sense. However, the other use case is this: > > Use #A to make something higher priority. Use #C to make it lower than any normal stuff. All the rest mingles in #B. > > So your proposal makes the assumption that any priority means more than no priority. > > - Carsten > I see what you mean. Maybe some orgees could indicate which use case they think is preferred. - Rainer