From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nuutti Kotivuori Subject: Numeric Priorities (Was: Re: org priority cycling - removing priorities) Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2007 17:30:44 +0300 Message-ID: <87ps0rx65n.fsf_-_@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> References: <46E00294.6020403@calicojack.co.uk> <7fa8cbf49995c5cb1dbd0ff46f6cd81d@science.uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IUx3F-0003OJ-AP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:08:37 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IUx3D-0003NM-Ts for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:08:36 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IUx3D-0003NE-Gk for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:08:35 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IUx3C-0004J9-TR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:08:35 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IUrcm-00019q-AI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:20:56 +0200 Received: from naked.iki.fi ([62.142.249.112]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:20:55 +0200 Received: from naked by naked.iki.fi with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:20:55 +0200 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Carsten Dominik wrote: > But as I said, this may not be good enough a reason. Open for > discussion. I find the priority settings almost unusable for me. For personal things, I just use them simply with the default settings to mark tasks that really should be done ASAP ([#A]) - and tasks which really aren't so important at all ([#C]). This is fine enough. But for my work tasks, priorities are really important as they are given to me externally. So I need a lot of priority levels, both up and down from the default. And atleast I'm not so savvy with alphabet, that I could instantly see how much less important [#P] is than [#T] - especially with respect to the default level etc. So, how about adding a new feature, org-todo-use-numeric-priorities. This would make the priorities be like: * TODO [#+2] Task 1 * TODO [#+1] Task 2 * TODO Task 3 * TODO [#-1] Task 4 * TODO [#-2] Task 5 And there wouldn't need to be any "highest" or "lowest" values for the priorities. Also, I couldn't ever figure out why there needs to be a way to specify the default priority explicitly (eg. [#B] vs. lines that have none) - so I'd just vote for dropping that - no priority listed if the priority is zero. This way I could always set some task on a higher priority if necessary, or a lower one - and I'd only have problems if I need to have something in between priorities (if we don't go for float values ;)), but that should be easily solvable by a bit of preplanning or just editing a few task priorities. How about it? -- Naked