emacs-orgmode@gnu.org archives
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed

* Basic organization question
@ 2011-01-15  3:35 Tommy Kelly
  2011-01-15  4:50 ` Erik Iverson
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Tommy Kelly @ 2011-01-15  3:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: emacs-orgmode

I can see that TODOs can be organized using tags, or categories, or
files, or simply subtrees (or several of those). Is there an obvious
choice? 

All I'm really looking for is a basic organization, to let me "group"
tasks of different broad functional areas -- accounting, recruitment,
IT, and so on.

And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
tasks get captured into a single refile.org file and then later moved
about into their classification homes.

But of those various ways of classifying, is there one to be preferred?

thanks,
Tommy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

• * Re: Basic organization question
    2011-01-15  3:35 Basic organization question Tommy Kelly
  @ 2011-01-15  4:50 ` Erik Iverson
    2011-01-15  5:11 ` Thomas S. Dye
    2011-01-15  5:53 ` Jambunathan K
    2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
  From: Erik Iverson @ 2011-01-15  4:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
    To: Tommy Kelly; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
  
  On 01/14/2011 09:35 PM, Tommy Kelly wrote:
  > I can see that TODOs can be organized using tags, or categories, or
  > files, or simply subtrees (or several of those). Is there an obvious
  > choice?
  
  My vote is "NO", org is really about finding what works best for you,
  and the plethora of choices reflects that different people work in
  different ways!  Try out a few until something feels natural.
  
  >
  > All I'm really looking for is a basic organization, to let me "group"
  > tasks of different broad functional areas -- accounting, recruitment,
  > IT, and so on.
  >
  > And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
  > tasks get captured into a single refile.org file and then later moved
  > about into their classification homes.
  >
  > But of those various ways of classifying, is there one to be preferred?
  >
  > thanks,
  > Tommy
  >
  >
  > _______________________________________________
  > Emacs-orgmode mailing list
  > Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
  > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
  > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
  
  ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

• * Re: Basic organization question
    2011-01-15  3:35 Basic organization question Tommy Kelly
    2011-01-15  4:50 ` Erik Iverson
  @ 2011-01-15  5:11 ` Thomas S. Dye
    2011-01-15 12:07   ` Tommy Kelly
    2011-01-15  5:53 ` Jambunathan K
    2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
  From: Thomas S. Dye @ 2011-01-15  5:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
    To: Tommy Kelly; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
  
  
  [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1286 bytes --]
  
  
  On Jan 14, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Tommy Kelly wrote:
  
  > I can see that TODOs can be organized using tags, or categories, or
  > files, or simply subtrees (or several of those). Is there an obvious
  > choice?
  >
  > All I'm really looking for is a basic organization, to let me "group"
  > tasks of different broad functional areas -- accounting, recruitment,
  > IT, and so on.
  >
  > And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
  > tasks get captured into a single refile.org file and then later moved
  > about into their classification homes.
  >
  > But of those various ways of classifying, is there one to be  
  > preferred?
  >
  
  Several times when I've had this type of question, I've found answers  
  I can use on Bernt Hansen's Org-mode pages:
  
  http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html
  
  After my last trip there a few months ago, I've been very happy with  
  the way Org-mode fits my work flow.  You don't have to share Bernt's  
  penchant for clocking to come away with very many useful and practical  
  ideas, all cleanly and precisely implemented.
  
  Tom
  
  > thanks,
  > Tommy
  >
  >
  > _______________________________________________
  > Emacs-orgmode mailing list
  > Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
  > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
  > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
  
  
  [-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2096 bytes --]
  
  [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 201 bytes --]
  
  _______________________________________________
  Emacs-orgmode mailing list
  Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
  Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
  http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
  
  ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

• • * Re: Basic organization question
      2011-01-15  5:11 ` Thomas S. Dye
    @ 2011-01-15 12:07   ` Tommy Kelly
      2011-01-17  2:58     ` Bernt Hansen
      0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
    From: Tommy Kelly @ 2011-01-15 12:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
      To: emacs-orgmode
    
    
    
    
    
    "Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com> writes:
    > Several times when I've had this type of question, I've found answers
    > I can use on Bernt Hansen's Org-mode pages:
    >
    > http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html
    
    Actually, when I said:
    
    >> And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
    
    I mis-copy/pasted. I was actually meaning Bernt's stuff. But although he seems
    to rely a lot on different files and subtrees, he also seems to get into
    tags and categories. I'm trying to take things slowly, adding a little
    bit more functionality at a time as needed. I don't want to jump
    straight to his overall method and then modify from there. 
    
    Tommy
    
    ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

  • • * Re: Basic organization question
        2011-01-15 12:07   ` Tommy Kelly
      @ 2011-01-17  2:58     ` Bernt Hansen
        2011-01-19 17:54       ` Tommy Kelly
        0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
      From: Bernt Hansen @ 2011-01-17  2:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
        To: Tommy Kelly; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
      
      Tommy Kelly <tommy.kelly@verilab.com> writes:
      
      > "Thomas S. Dye" <tsd@tsdye.com> writes:
      >> Several times when I've had this type of question, I've found answers
      >> I can use on Bernt Hansen's Org-mode pages:
      >>
      >> http://doc.norang.ca/org-mode.html
      >
      > Actually, when I said:
      >
      >>> And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
      >
      > I mis-copy/pasted. I was actually meaning Bernt's stuff. But although he seems
      > to rely a lot on different files and subtrees, he also seems to get into
      > tags and categories. I'm trying to take things slowly, adding a little
      > bit more functionality at a time as needed. I don't want to jump
      > straight to his overall method and then modify from there. 
      
      Hi Tommy,
      
      I use categories only as a visual cue on the agenda for what the task is
      related to.  TAGS are much more flexible for controlling what you see on
      the agenda and I use tags for filtering what is displayed on the agenda.
      
      Taking things slow and adding only what you need for your workflow is
      definitely how I recommend you approach your use of org-mode.  That's
      what I did.
      
      The only use I have for categories is the left-column display of the
      agenda showing what category some task belongs to.  I find that a little
      easier to read (at a glance) than a bunch of tags that are applied to
      the task.
      
      I tried various approaches and in the beginning everything was in one
      big file for me.  I started separating things when it logically made
      sense to me to do that (and the single-file was getting unweildy).
      
      Try stuff out and see if you like it.  Figure out what works best for
      you.
      
      HTH,
      Bernt
      
      ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

    • • * Re: Basic organization question
          2011-01-17  2:58     ` Bernt Hansen
        @ 2011-01-19 17:54       ` Tommy Kelly
          2011-01-19 18:40         ` Bernt Hansen
          0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
        From: Tommy Kelly @ 2011-01-19 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
          To: Bernt Hansen; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
        
        Bernt,
        
        Still digging into this. You said:
        
        > TAGS are much more flexible for controlling what you see on
        > the agenda and I use tags for filtering what is displayed on the agenda.
        
        Am I right though that from the point of view of clocking tasks, you
        rely not on TAGS but on having each task live inside the appropriate
        file/heading/sub-heading/sub-sub-heading and so on? 
        
        Or do you have some jiggery pokery to let clocking and clock tables be
        sensitive to TAGs?
        
        Overall it looks like you use file-and-level-of-subheading to categorize things
        according to general area (clientX, clientY, or accounting, research,
        and so on), and then you use TAGs in addition to orthogonally categorize
        things according to some aspect of your workflow (it's a phone call, it
        has GTD context @wibble, it needs refiled, and so on). Is that remotely
        accurate? 
        
        thanks,
        Tommy
        
        ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

      • • * Re: Basic organization question
            2011-01-19 17:54       ` Tommy Kelly
          @ 2011-01-19 18:40         ` Bernt Hansen
            0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
          From: Bernt Hansen @ 2011-01-19 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
            To: Tommy Kelly; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
          
          Hi Tommy,
          
          Comments are inline below.
          
          Tommy Kelly <tommy.kelly@verilab.com> writes:
          
          > Bernt,
          >
          > Still digging into this. You said:
          >
          >> TAGS are much more flexible for controlling what you see on
          >> the agenda and I use tags for filtering what is displayed on the agenda.
          >
          > Am I right though that from the point of view of clocking tasks, you
          > rely not on TAGS but on having each task live inside the appropriate
          > file/heading/sub-heading/sub-sub-heading and so on? 
          
          Yes each task lives in the appropriate file and subtree.  It is only
          possible to clock tasks.  I clock in tasks both from the agenda and
          directly from inside org files.  Finding the thing to clock in is what I
          use the agenda for -- I find a task with an agenda view (limited by
          tags) and clock in the task directly with I in the agenda view.
          
          > Or do you have some jiggery pokery to let clocking and clock tables be
          > sensitive to TAGs?
          
          I mostly use R and C-u R in the agenda for clock reports.  The C-u R
          version limits the displayed clock report based on your current agenda
          tags filter.
          
          Dynamic clock reports can also be limited by tags but I am not currently
          using this feature.
          
          I use persistent tags filters so when I set a tag filter to HOME it
          stays that way until I change it.  This lets me look at the agenda for
          this week limited to HOME tasks, and also TODO and NEXT tasks for only
          tasks with the HOME tag.
          
          > Overall it looks like you use file-and-level-of-subheading to categorize things
          > according to general area (clientX, clientY, or accounting, research,
          > and so on), and then you use TAGs in addition to orthogonally categorize
          > things according to some aspect of your workflow (it's a phone call, it
          > has GTD context @wibble, it needs refiled, and so on). Is that remotely
          > accurate? 
          
          Yes pretty much.  I tend to group project related things into a file and
          give it a #+FILETAGS: entry so everything in that file gets some tag.
          Then I can limit my agenda view to just include or just exclude those
          things depending on my current work context.
          
          Inside a file I'll also have tagged entries for PHONE, NOTE, CANCELLED,
          FLAGGED, @somewhere, etc so I can further refine the displayed tasks in
          my agenda view.
          
          Regards,
          Bernt
          
          ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

• * Re: Basic organization question
    2011-01-15  3:35 Basic organization question Tommy Kelly
    2011-01-15  4:50 ` Erik Iverson
    2011-01-15  5:11 ` Thomas S. Dye
  @ 2011-01-15  5:53 ` Jambunathan K
    2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
  From: Jambunathan K @ 2011-01-15  5:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
    To: Tommy Kelly; +Cc: emacs-orgmode
  
  
  > I can see that TODOs can be organized using tags, or categories, or
  > files, or simply subtrees (or several of those). Is there an obvious
  > choice? 
  
  From my own experience, Orgmode 'favors' tags more than categories i.e.,
  there is more bells and whistles surrounding tags rather than
  categories.
  
  If you are starting out, my recommendation would be to fit/think (or
  re-fit/re-think) your personal workflow in terms of tags rather than
  categories.
  
  The key principle is tags to headline/task association is dynamic while
  tags to category association is persistent.
  
  >
  > All I'm really looking for is a basic organization, to let me "group"
  > tasks of different broad functional areas -- accounting, recruitment,
  > IT, and so on.
  >
  
  I suggest one file for each with a FILETAG attached to them. It might
  help you to define some sequence and specialized TODO keywords.
  
  Have zero tags to begin with and limit your tags as much as possible.
  
  Jambunathan K.
  
  > And I like the idea discussed in http://orgmode.org/org.html, where
  > tasks get captured into a single refile.org file and then later moved
  > about into their classification homes.
  >
  > But of those various ways of classifying, is there one to be preferred?
  >
  > thanks,
  > Tommy
  >
  >
  > _______________________________________________
  > Emacs-orgmode mailing list
  > Please use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
  > Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
  > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
  
  ^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

* Re: Basic organization question
@ 2011-01-19 17:57 Tommy Kelly
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Tommy Kelly @ 2011-01-19 17:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bernt; +Cc: emacs-orgmode

Bernt,

Still digging into this. You said:

> TAGS are much more flexible for controlling what you see on
> the agenda and I use tags for filtering what is displayed on the agenda.

Am I right though that from the point of view of clocking tasks, you
rely not on TAGS but on having each task live inside the appropriate
file/heading/sub-heading/sub-sub-heading and so on?

Or do you have some jiggery pokery to let clocking and clock tables be
sensitive to TAGs?

Overall it looks like you use file-and-level-of-subheading to categorize things
according to general area (clientX, clientY, or accounting, research,
and so on), and then you use TAGs in addition to orthogonally categorize
things according to some aspect of your workflow (it's a phone call, it
has GTD context @wibble, it needs refiled, and so on). Is that remotely
accurate?

thanks,
Tommy


-- 
Tommy Kelly
+1 (512) 289-8262
http://www.verilab.com

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2011-01-19 18:40 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-01-15  3:35 Basic organization question Tommy Kelly
2011-01-15  4:50 ` Erik Iverson
2011-01-15  5:11 ` Thomas S. Dye
2011-01-15 12:07   ` Tommy Kelly
2011-01-17  2:58     ` Bernt Hansen
2011-01-19 17:54       ` Tommy Kelly
2011-01-19 18:40         ` Bernt Hansen
2011-01-15  5:53 ` Jambunathan K
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-01-19 17:57 Tommy Kelly

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).