Re: property searches for #+CATEGORY

From: Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>
To: Tim O'Callaghan <tim.ocallaghan@gmail.com>
Cc: org-mode mailing list <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: property searches for #+CATEGORY
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 17:15:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <F4EE85D7-26D6-4BC5-A882-90A7C2A34811@science.uva.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3d6808890711070559x3b24ed3djc4276fdc09d074a9@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for an interesting discussion about the merits of properties
versus tags etc.  Very illuminating.

However, I do think that Adam's initial request to make the
category available as a special property for queries in not
unreasonble.  Or does anyone disagree?

I am not sure, though, if the #+CATEGORY category should be
available with `org-entry-get', because it would then be very
hard for the property API to make a difference between a value
that is intimately associated with the current entry, and a
value that might be derived by some other mechanism.  So here I
differ somewhat from Adam's feeling that category is just like
TODO or a tag.  It is different.

But for the search interface, to allow CATEGORY="work", I think
that would be a safe thing to do.  Will be in 5.14, unless I hear
good arguments against this.

- Carsten

On  7Nov2007, at 2:59 PM, Tim O'Callaghan wrote:

> On 07/11/2007, Adam Spiers <orgmode@adamspiers.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 02:23:12PM +0100, Tim O'Callaghan wrote:
>>> On 07/11/2007, Adam Spiers <orgmode@adamspiers.org> wrote:
>>>> I have several personal .org files, and several work-related  
>>>> ones too.
>>>> In each personal file, I have a line:
>>>>
>>>>   #+CATEGORY: personal
>>>>
>>>> and in each work-related file, I have a line:
>>>>
>>>>   #+CATEGORY: work
>>>>
>>>> I would like to be able to bind agenda custom commands to do tag
>>>> searches which are narrowed to one of these categories, e.g.  
>>>> "show me
>>>> all personal priority #A tasks".  Such a search needs to span *all*
>>>> agenda files, therefore the standard per-buffer narrowing  
>>>> provided by
>>>> the '<' binding in the *Agenda Commands* buffer is insufficient.
>>>>
>>>> Would it make sense to include CATEGORY as a special property?   
>>>> After
>>>> all, pretty much all other per-task meta-data ("TODO", "PRIORITY"
>>>> etc.) are already available via the property interface, and this  
>>>> way,
>>>> I could easily achieve what I need with tag searches such as
>>>>
>>>>   CATEGORY="personal"+PRIORITY="A"
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> It would seem to me that this is exactly what tags does.
>>> You could move everything down a level and use tag inheritance:
>>> * personal stuff :personal:
>>> * work stuff :work:
>>
>> I could, but this would mean that each file would have a single
>> top-level entry, and the entire contents would be indented an extra
>> level, which I fear is a rather unattractive solution!
>>
>
> It's the technique i've been using, and yes, it is unattractive.
>
> When i thought of tags, it was not explicitly for GTD context
> specifier, it was also for adding searchable metadata to a todo node.
> I'm finding out that it gets diluted somewhat.
>
> It guess its a matter of taxonomy. Roughly i would see this as:
>
> 1. State - TODO - DO/CANCEL/DONE
> 2. Context - tags - :@home:@phone:
> 3. Date/Time - <2007-10-10>
> 4. Meta Context - Category - personal, work etc,
> 5. Meta State - Properties drawer - :EMAIL:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> 6. Meta DateTime - state/time logging -
>
> How about adding the context to the tag table with a prefix  
> character, say #?
>
> Tim.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode