From: Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com>
To: John Tait <johngtait@gmail.com>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
Subject: Re: "Tag hierarchy" idea
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:04:47 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <81zkoklpk8.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikmxrx59u=Xrue-rPK3iepSk3t-pL6ZyZ_xmLTT@mail.gmail.com> (John Tait's message of "Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:57:59 +0000")
IIUC, what you are saying is that you would like to define few atomic
tags and a few composite tag. A composite tag is presumably a union of
some of those atomic tags. You need an ability to selectively export of
the items that fall under the composite tag.
Orgmode allows selective viewing (and exporting) of tagged documents. I
think all you need is to define a query and export only the visible
portion of the document. (I don't use tagging much but you can get
useful information from the manual)
It still it beats me how would you solve the problem of migrating
existing word documents in to Orgmode. Looks like that is a much bigger
problem right there than the lack of facility for elaborate hierarchical
organization.
Jambunathan K.
John Tait <johngtait@gmail.com> writes:
> Thanks for your replies.
>
>
>
> I'm using org-mode both as an organiser and also as a way of composing modular
> documents with conditional text (controlled by both tags and #+INCLUDE).
>
>
>
> The problem I am trying to solve is one I encounter in my day job. Basically, I am
> sitting on top on hundreds of legacy Word documents, each filled with technical
> requirements aimed at different audiences. Each document can itself be aimed at
> different people and contain various subjects. This is a typical legacy document
> problem. It is horrible.
>
>
>
> Occasionally, we have to update vast amounts of this stuff as a batch, to reflect
> organisational change or other initiative. It is a manual slog.
>
>
>
> I am naturally drawn to dealing with this via some kind of structured document
> solution. This main problem here is that the information is inherently
> unstructured. It awas never written with structure in mind. It is impossible to
> impose a structure upon it without starting again.
>
>
>
> Attempts by management to enter all this stuff into the IBM DOORS requirements
> "database" have been so far been of only "limited success".
>
>
>
> We still get asked to produce tailored, filtered summarised information. These
> requests usually aren't satisfactorily resolved because a mountain of crumbling
> Word documents isn't a good starting point.
>
>
>
> That's the problem. Structured documents are an ideal, but totally impractical.
>
>
>
> Examples of requests might be:
>
>
>
> -- show me all the (railway) level crossing requirements in one place.
>
> -- show all everything to do with track patrolling.
>
> -- show all everything to do with track patrolling that a track patroller needs to
> see (no process or other office stuff).
>
> -- show me everything a Senior Engineer needs to know about this.
>
>
>
> etc.
>
>
>
> So there is a certain concept hierarchy beginning to form, but one that is fluid
> and maybe only needed once.
>
>
>
> I don't want to apply lots of tags only to have to add fresh tags later if ideas
> change. On the other hand, some tags would be pretty stable (:level-crossings:),
> especially if I was to use an abstraction (":M123:") in place, so I could change
> the definition of the tags slightly without altering the tag. (The definition of
> ":M123:" could, say, change from "Level crossing" to "Level crossing and road--rail
> access points".)
>
>
>
> (I used to work for Derwent Patents, applying concept tags to patents for help with
> patent searches, so this actually works.)
>
>
>
> The power of a tag hierarchy could be that I could alter and create groups for
> export very easily. It hard to come up with concrete examples for something that is
> just an idea but I will try.
>
>
>
> Say there are tags called :level-crossing: and :road--rail-access: If I could have
> a meta tag called ":access: that I could assign :level-crossing: and
> :road--rail-access: to, I could just use a single tag.
>
>
>
> Later, I could add ":gates:" to ":access:." and include those.
>
>
>
> Later, I could have a new meta tag called :roads:, and include ":level-crossing:"
> and "road-bridge".
>
>
>
> Then I could have a meta tag called ":patrol:", and include tags for
> ":level-crossing:" and ":patroller:".
>
>
>
> I hope I am illustrating this well enough. The point is that adding individual tags
> to headings could be complimented by grouping them under top level tags. The top
> level tags could be added to heading as well for maximum flexibility.
>
>
>
> This would provide awesome control and flexibility!
>
>
>
> Thanks for your time!
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Christian Moe <mail@christianmoe.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> There
> was
> some
> discussion
> of
> tag
> hierarchies
> in
> this
> thread:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/31882
> It
> was
> largely
> inconclusive,
> except
> that
> it
> would
> be
> hard
> to
> implement. Noone
> took
> the
> ball
> and
> ran
> with
> it,
> but
> then
> noone
> came
> up
> with
> a
> strong
> use
> case
> or
> specification,
> either. Anyway,
> I
> recommend
> a
> look
> at
> that
> thread
> before
> continuing
> it
> here.
> Yours, Christian
>
>
> On
> 3/22/11
> 12:09
> AM,
> John
> Tait
> wrote:
>
> Hi
> all
> This
> is
> my
> first
> post. First,
> I'd
> like
> to
> thank
> all
> the
> org-mode developers
> for
> a
> great
> tool.
> I'm
> a
> technical
> editor. I
> am
> facinated
> by
> the
> pros
> and
> cons
> of structured
> documents
> with
> regard
> to
> their
> ease
> of
> use
> and
> power. I think
> that
> they
> are
> probably
> far
> too
> restrictive
> and
> cumbersome (looking
> at
> you,
> DITA)
> for
> the
> average
> technical
> document. Nevertheless,
> the
> idea
> of
> modular
> documents
> is
> an
> appealing
> one
> to
> me. I
> like
> conditional
> text
> features
> (e.g. in
> LyX).
> In
> org-mode,
> I
> really
> really
> love
> selective
> export
> (include/exclude tags)
> and
> using
> #+INCLUDE:
> for
> including
> other
> files. This
> gives
> me enormous
> flexibility,
> with
> zero
> DITA
> pain.
> May
> I
> propose
> an
> additional
> feature?
> I
> haven't
> seen
> anything
> like
> it published
> anywhere,
> though
> maybe
> I
> am
> using
> the
> incorrect
> search terms. (I
> am
> getting
> enormous
> vertigo
> and
> time-travel
> sickness
> reading up
> on
> Lisp,
> XML,
> DITA,
> etc.)
> It's
> a
> pretty
> basic
> idea,
> but
> I
> hope
> you
> can
> take
> a
> moment
> to
> weigh
> up its
> potential.
> We
> could
> assign
> tags
> to
> hierarchies
> of
> other
> tags.
>
> #+TAG-NEST:
> (colour(red
> green
> blue)) #+TAG-NEST:
> (type(colour
> size)) #+TAG-NEST:
> (car(type
> price))
> or
> maybe
> like
> this. I'd
> leave
> it
> up
> to
> someone
> with
> actual
> programming experience
> and
> a
> logical
> mind
> (my
> productive
> programming
> was
> PASCAL
> in 1991)
> to
> suggest
> a
> rigorous
> system
> that
> makes
> sense.
> #+TAG-NEST:
> colour
> >
> red:green:blue #+TAG-NEST:
> type
> >
> colour:size #+TAG-NEST:
> car
> >
> type:price
> The
> point
> of
> this
> would
> be
> that
> selecting,
> say,
> "colour"
> as
> a
> tag would
> bring
> along
> "red",
> "green",
> and
> "blue"
> along
> with
> it. The
> tag "type"
> would
> bring
> "colour",
> "red",
> "green",
> "blue"
> and
> "size"
> with
> it.
> The
> power
> of
> this
> would
> be
> that
> hierarchies
> could
> be
> adjusted
> and manipulated
> as
> necessary.
> Since
> there
> is
> no
> one
> definitive
> way
> to
> tag
> real
> world
> objects
> and ideas
> into
> nice
> nested
> boxes
> (thanks,
> AI
> research),
> we
> could
> adjust any
> tag
> hierarchies
> to
> suit
> experience
> and
> changing
> priorities. Even hierarchies
> could
> just
> be
> thrown
> away
> without
> affecting
> existing
> tags too
> much,
> since
> tagged
> headings
> could
> just
> be
> selected/excluded
> as
> usual.
> This
> way,
> we
> can
> use
> concept
> hierarchies
> as
> the
> disposable conveniences
> that
> they
> are,
> without
> getting
> locked
> into
> them. Looking at
> stuff
> like
> XSLT
> transformation
> for
> XML,
> that'd
> be
> worth
> avoiding.
> Maybe
> there
> is
> some
> logical
> lispy
> reason
> why
> this
> couldn't
> work,
> but
> I hope
> this
> is
> worthy
> of
> your
> consideration.
> John
> ------
> While
> I
> am
> here
> (sorry),
> I
> couldn't
> get
> #+FILETAGS:
> to
> work
> in org-version
> 7.4.
> For
> example,
> if
> I
> export
> a
> file
> (to
> html)
> File1.org
> with "#+EXPORT_EXCLUDE_TAGS:
> john",
> and
> then
> I
> include
> File2.org,
> I
> can
> see File2.org
> included
> as
> part
> the
> export
> of
> File1
> as
> expected. If
> I
> then set
> "#+FILETAGS:
> :john:"
> in
> File2,
> I'd
> expect
> File2
> to
> now
> be excluded,
> but
> it
> still
> appears. If
> I
> then
> tag
> a
> File2
> heading
> as
> say "*
> Heading
> :john:",
> then
> it
> won't
> appear
> in
> the
> File1
> export,
> as expected. Am
> I
> missing
> something?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-24 11:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-21 23:09 "Tag hierarchy" idea John Tait
2011-03-22 0:57 ` Matt Lundin
[not found] ` <AANLkTikwOWJdqKrZDE+JUzezEpvfNQ537xRgtzYgssAd@mail.gmail.com>
2011-03-22 14:17 ` Matt Lundin
2011-03-22 4:08 ` Jambunathan K
2011-03-22 8:27 ` Christian Moe
2011-03-22 13:57 ` John Tait
2011-03-24 11:34 ` Jambunathan K [this message]
2011-03-24 22:27 ` John Tait
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=81zkoklpk8.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=kjambunathan@gmail.com \
--cc=emacs-orgmode@gnu.org \
--cc=johngtait@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).