From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: When is a TODO really a TODO ? ... Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 07:50:46 +0100 Message-ID: <6E89C935-605F-46C8-8B97-63FEE2A827F5@science.uva.nl> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IowiJ-0007xE-7x for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:49:39 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IowiE-0007qg-Al for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:49:38 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IowiD-0007qc-OM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:49:33 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IowiC-0002BV-Mb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:49:32 -0500 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.173]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IowiB-0006aM-0B for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 02:49:31 -0500 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id a2so954289ugf for ; Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:49:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: 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: Richard G Riley Cc: org-mode Hi Richard, you make an interesting point. The fact that items with a process state are called TODO items had two roots: - historically: Initially, there was only TODO and DONE. - pedagogically: Org-mode tries to be "easy-entry, but then lots of stuff under the hood". This is why TODO items are introduced the way they are. You said that you have been confused by this, so maybe it is not the right way after all. Any proposals on how to address this in the docs? - Carsten On 4Nov2007, at 6:38 PM, Richard G Riley wrote: > > I'd just like to point a little issue when discussing TODO items. > There > is frequently a tendency to confuse an item marked with "TODO" for a > TODO item .... > > e.g > > ,---- > | C-c C-v runs the command org-show-todo-tree > | which is an interactive compiled Lisp function in `/home/ > shamrock/programming/lisp/org-5.13h/org.elc'. > | It is bound to C-c C-v, Tree>, . > | (org-show-todo-tree arg) > | > | Make a compact tree which shows all headlines marked with TODO. > `---- > > Items marked with TODO are not more special than one marked with > APPLE : > its all down to the sequences e.g > > #+SEQ_TODO: APPLE(t) WAITING(w@) INPROGRESS(p@) | DONE(d) CANCELLED > (x@) DELEGATED(l@) > > And the org-show-todo-tree actually shows any tasks marked as "in > sequence" or "being processed" if you will > > I mention this because I got confused a lot earlier in my experiences > with org-mode as to what TODO items really are. It seems, and please > correct me if I am wrong, that there really are not any TODO items - > there are only items assigned a process status. ie far more generic. > > Anyway, just some idle thoughts! > > > _______________________________________________ > 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