From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Subject: Re: inheritance of mutually exclusive tags
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:26:28 +0100
Message-ID: <87d1e9domz.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
References: <CALeTTmG3X-FgHmyHAmjW02PkjnG4DRY9hooB7_wnWUD_c4HBUg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50239)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1cgtPj-0005JM-Gw
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 08:26:32 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>) id 1cgtPi-0006k1-Pm
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 08:26:31 -0500
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::196]:53051)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>)
	id 1cgtPi-0006ik-JT
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 08:26:30 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CALeTTmG3X-FgHmyHAmjW02PkjnG4DRY9hooB7_wnWUD_c4HBUg@mail.gmail.com>
	(yanmcbe@gmail.com's message of "Wed, 28 Dec 2016 14:29:21 +0100")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: yanmcbe <yanmcbe@gmail.com>
Cc: org mode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Hello,

yanmcbe <yanmcbe@gmail.com> writes:

> Org-mode allows marking a set of tags as mutually exclusive. It also allows
> the inheritance of tags.
>
> (from now on I am talking only about these mutually exclusive tags)
>
> When a tag is set in a parent, but also in a child, what I expect to happen
> is that the child is not included in searches/selections with the parent
> tag.
>
> In the example [0], a search for black (e.g. C-/ m black <ret>) should not
> match poodle, because it is white.
>
> Now I realize that the mutually exclusive tag concept is probably only a
> convenience for adding tags with C-c. And it doesn't seem to have any other
> implications, but it would be nice to have. Do you think this is a
> possibility or that I could get this behaviour some other way?

I'm late to the party, but it sounds like a good idea. It would need to
be properly documented however, as it could be surprising.

Would you want to provide a patch for that?

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou