Re: bug? org does not seem to sort by prioritiy #A, #B, #C, #D

[Rainer Stengele <rainer.stengele@diplan.de>]

Am 21.10.2010 11:01, schrieb Carsten Dominik:
>
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote:
>
>> Am 21.10.2010 09:39, schrieb Carsten Dominik:
>>>
>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 21.10.2010 09:21, schrieb Carsten Dominik:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:12 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 21.10.2010 09:07, schrieb Carsten Dominik:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> maybe this is a bug: (Org-mode version 7.01trans (release_7.01h.605.gc540)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having set
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>>>>>> Org Enable Priority Commands: Hide Value Toggle  on (non-nil)
>>>>>>>> State: STANDARD.
>>>>>>>> Non-nil means priority commands are active. Hide Rest
>>>>>>>> When nil, these commands will be disabled, so that you never accidentally
>>>>>>>> set a priority.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Org Highest Priority: Hide Value A
>>>>>>>> State: STANDARD.
>>>>>>>> The highest priority of TODO items.  A character like ?A, ?B etc. More
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Org Lowest Priority: Hide Value D
>>>>>>>> State: SAVED and set.
>>>>>>>> The lowest priority of TODO items.  A character like ?A, ?B etc. More
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Org Default Priority: Hide Value D
>>>>>>>> State: SAVED and set.
>>>>>>>> The default priority of TODO items. More
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> resulting correctly in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (custom-set-variables
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> '(org-highest-priority 65)
>>>>>>>> '(org-default-priority 68)
>>>>>>>> '(org-lowest-priority 68)
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> ==============================================================================
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the custom agenda command
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  ("Tp" "all todos sorted by prio"
>>>>>>>>   (
>>>>>>>>    (alltodo "all todos" ))
>>>>>>>>   ((org-agenda-sorting-strategy '(priority-down))))
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> will sort correctly by priorities #A, #B, #C, descending,
>>>>>>>> but will then mix up the rest of the todos with "#D" or without priority.
>>>>>>>> "#D" does not seem to be included in the sorting.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The meaning of the default priority is that tasks without a priority do have
>>>>>>> the default priority.  If you need 4 priorities all higher than "normal tasks",
>>>>>>> make E your lowest and default priority
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Carsten
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, works now. A bit counterintuitive, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> What would be the "intuitive" meaning of default priority then?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Carsten
>>>> Well, I would have expected that if I define a priority #D as lowest priority it is not excluded from sorting.
>>>
>>>
>>> It *is* included in the sorting. All #D's come after the #A's, #B's, and #C's.  Only that "all #D's" includes all entries that have no specified priority.  Within each main priority, the precise order of the entries is determined by other
>>> factors well, like if it is a deadline or an overdue scheduled item.....  That make the D's look random and the other not - but the same is going on everywhere.
>>>
>>> You can look at the computed priority (which is used for sorting) by pressing (I think) "P" on every item.
>>>
>>> Would you like to make a proposal for a paragraph in the manual to clarify this?  Or are you proposing to change how this works?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> - Carsten
>>>
>> My guessing is that a naive user (like me ...) does expect any defined priority (like #D in this case) to have a higher priority than a "non" priority item.
>
> I see how that makes sense.  However, the other use case is this:
>
> Use #A to make something higher priority.  Use #C to make it lower than any normal stuff.  All the rest mingles in #B.
>
> So your proposal makes the assumption that any priority means more than no priority.
>
> - Carsten
>
I see what you mean.
Maybe some orgees could indicate which use case they think is preferred.

- Rainer