specifying priority with template expansion

specifying priority with template expansion

[David A. Thompson]

An expansion for setting priority doesn't seem to be an option when 
using capture functionality with template expansion (at least in the 
online documentation). Instead, setting priority seems to require a few 
additional key strokes after capturing an item.

Is there a straightforward way to pull off cuing for priority in a 
capture template? Mailing list/google searches didn't reveal much along 
these lines leaving me wondering if I've missed something obvious...

Thanks for any and all suggestions (I've found org-mode to be a very 
helpful tool -- thanks to the authors/contributors for their efforts).

- Alan

Re: specifying priority with template expansion

[Jeff Horn]

Can you give us a better idea of the use case? As I understand,
unprioritzed todos count as "B" by default. Since most of my tasks
have a priority of B, I've never found setting priorities to be
helpful until I sit down to review my work for the day.

I prioritize items that are important (or urgent) with A at the
beginning of the day (no more than a couple, usually). Most items are
"B" and rarely more than half of those get done.

If I want to "sink" an item but keep it scheduled, it gets a priority of "C".

These are often things I do not know when recording an item.

Interested to hear your thoughts,
Jeff

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:00 PM, David A. Thompson <thompdump@gmail.com> wrote:
> An expansion for setting priority doesn't seem to be an option when using
> capture functionality with template expansion (at least in the online
> documentation). Instead, setting priority seems to require a few additional
> key strokes after capturing an item.
>
> Is there a straightforward way to pull off cuing for priority in a capture
> template? Mailing list/google searches didn't reveal much along these lines
> leaving me wondering if I've missed something obvious...
>
> Thanks for any and all suggestions (I've found org-mode to be a very helpful
> tool -- thanks to the authors/contributors for their efforts).
>
> - Alan
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Jeffrey Horn
Graduate Lecturer and PhD Student in Economics
George Mason University

(704) 271-4797
jhorn@gmu.edu
jrhorn424@gmail.com

http://www.failuretorefrain.com/jeff/

Re: specifying priority with template expansion

[David A. Thompson]

On 12/03/2010 12:40 PM, Jeff Horn wrote:
> Can you give us a better idea of the use case? As I understand,
> unprioritzed todos count as "B" by default. Since most of my tasks
> have a priority of B, I've never found setting priorities to be
> helpful until I sit down to review my work for the day.
>
> I prioritize items that are important (or urgent) with A at the
> beginning of the day (no more than a couple, usually). Most items are
> "B" and rarely more than half of those get done.
>
> If I want to "sink" an item but keep it scheduled, it gets a priority of "C".

Most of my todos are neither associated with deadlines nor are they 
scheduled. Schedules and deadlines have seemed a more time-intensive way 
to go relative to setting priorities (but perhaps this is a 'Green Eggs 
and Ham' thing?)

> These are often things I do not know when recording an item.

I guess the main difference is that I generally am typically able to 
recognize, when recording a todo, whether it's in the 'urgent/asap' pile 
(A), the 'try-and-get-it-done-sometime-soon' pile (B), or in a 
'sure-would-be-nice-to-get-it-done' pile (C). Given that, it seemed both 
logical and more efficient to immediately prioritize the item rather 
than going back later and prioritizing the item.

Thanks for any additional thoughts/suggestions...

- Alan

>

Re: specifying priority with template expansion

[Jeff Horn]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 5:42 PM, David A. Thompson <thompdump@gmail.com> wrote:
> Most of my todos are neither associated with deadlines nor are they
> scheduled. Schedules and deadlines have seemed a more time-intensive way to
> go relative to setting priorities (but perhaps this is a 'Green Eggs and
> Ham' thing?)

Maybe. :-)

They were certainly the ticket for me.

> I guess the main difference is that I generally am typically able to
> recognize, when recording a todo, whether it's in the 'urgent/asap' pile
> (A), the 'try-and-get-it-done-sometime-soon' pile (B), or in a
> 'sure-would-be-nice-to-get-it-done' pile (C). Given that, it seemed both
> logical and more efficient to immediately prioritize the item rather than
> going back later and prioritizing the item.

Someone else is probably better suited to address your original post.
As far as additional thoughts, I was only thinking about keystroke
savings:

1) You can set priorities in agenda view by typing a comma and
choosing priority. You can set them anywhere with =C-c ,=. Or, you can
simply type them, =[#A]=.
2) Say you type them. That's four keystrokes. You could use =%?= in a
template to past the cursor within the priority cookie, like =[#%?]=.
But then you need two keystrokes to get out.
3) Whether 2) saves more time than 1) isn't clear to me, but might fit
your case until/if/when priorities are added to templates.

Hope this helps,
Jeff

-- 
Jeffrey Horn
Graduate Lecturer and PhD Student in Economics
George Mason University

(704) 271-4797
jhorn@gmu.edu
jrhorn424@gmail.com

http://www.failuretorefrain.com/jeff/

Re: specifying priority with template expansion

[Memnon Anon]

Jeff Horn <jrhorn424@gmail.com> writes:

> Someone else is probably better suited to address your original post.
> As far as additional thoughts, I was only thinking about keystroke
> savings:
>
> 1) You can set priorities in agenda view by typing a comma and
> choosing priority. You can set them anywhere with =C-c ,=. Or, you can
> simply type them, =[#A]=.

Or just use '+' and '-'. 
With ABC Priorities, thats even less keystrokes ;)

- Memnon

Re: specifying priority with template expansion

[Carsten Dominik]

On Dec 3, 2010, at 11:42 PM, David A. Thompson wrote:

> On 12/03/2010 12:40 PM, Jeff Horn wrote:
>> Can you give us a better idea of the use case? As I understand,
>> unprioritzed todos count as "B" by default. Since most of my tasks
>> have a priority of B, I've never found setting priorities to be
>> helpful until I sit down to review my work for the day.
>>
>> I prioritize items that are important (or urgent) with A at the
>> beginning of the day (no more than a couple, usually). Most items are
>> "B" and rarely more than half of those get done.
>>
>> If I want to "sink" an item but keep it scheduled, it gets a  
>> priority of "C".
>
> Most of my todos are neither associated with deadlines nor are they  
> scheduled. Schedules and deadlines have seemed a more time-intensive  
> way to go relative to setting priorities (but perhaps this is a  
> 'Green Eggs and Ham' thing?)
>
>> These are often things I do not know when recording an item.
>
> I guess the main difference is that I generally am typically able to  
> recognize, when recording a todo, whether it's in the 'urgent/asap'  
> pile (A), the 'try-and-get-it-done-sometime-soon' pile (B), or in a  
> 'sure-would-be-nice-to-get-it-done' pile (C). Given that, it seemed  
> both logical and more efficient to immediately prioritize the item  
> rather than going back later and prioritizing the item.

You might want to consider to make separate templates with two-key  
access for these different priorities.  Then you could uce

C-c c t a   for priority A
C-c c t b   for priority B

etc.

Might be more efficient in your case then reading and responding to a  
prompt.

But my intuition would also be to just assume B (which is the same as  
giving NO priority at all), and changing it to A or C with S-up and S- 
down on the headline while editing the template.

HTH

- Carsten