From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Re: Release: Org-mode 5.09 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:36:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87y7f19zeg.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <200709181700.17786.zslevin@gmail.com> <572452f66890dd8ebca04908cbd33e29@gmail.com> <87y7f3v5qh.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <69ce18fe638d5ec66232d221c36c7814@science.uva.nl> <871wctcvfa.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87zlzhsa4d.fsf@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> 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 1IYN9N-00016S-6R for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:37:05 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IYN9L-00016G-7n for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:37:04 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYN9L-00016D-4U for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:37:03 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.191]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IYN9K-0007Kb-PN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:37:02 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so484388nfh for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 07:37:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87zlzhsa4d.fsf@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> (Nuutti Kotivuori's message of "Thu, 20 Sep 2007 17:08:02 +0300") 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 Nuutti Kotivuori writes: > Bastien wrote: >> The only thing that still tickles me here is that the *default* priority >> is not the *easiest* to assign. So why not this: > > I've never understood what's the difference between a line with the > default priority and a line without a priority at all. Depends on what "default" stands for. It can be either: 1. the first available state when setting priorities 2. the default state you *want* to use when you need to set a priority; 3. the state that neither increase or decrease the priority rating > That is, with > the default settings: > > * [#B] Foo > * Bar > > Are these not equivalent in priority sorting? For sorting with org-sort, yes. But I use this convention that any item that has a priority - even the default priority - should be done before other items. For example: * [#A] Foo * [#B] Bar * [#C] Fooo * Baar In this case, * Baar and * [#B] are not equivalent. > If so, why should the default priority be ever explicitly said? To quickly be able to choose this default priority when cycling? :) -- Bastien