Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Changes to Tag groups - allow nesting and regexps

[Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>]

Hello,

Gustav Wikström <gustav.erik@gmail.com> writes:

> This time I've made some changes in the code. More specifically in how
> tag groups function and would like them to be included in Orgmode.

Thank you.
>
> I suppose an FSF-assignment signature is needed before it can be
> included.

Indeed.

> I'll start with that process if this is something the
> community can agree to include. But until then; please take it for a
> ride.

OK. Some comments follow.

> The changes are listed below:
>
> - Grouptags don't have to be unique on a headline if added with [ ]
>   instead of with { }:
>   ,----
>   | #+TAGS: [ group : include1 included2 ]
>   `----

I'd rather not introduce yet another syntax for group tags. IIUC, the
current one (with curly braces) can be extended. 

Also, I don't get the "have to be unique on a headline" part.

> - Grouptags can have regular expressions as "sub-tags". The regular
>   expressions in the group must be marked up within { }. Example use:
>
>   ,----
>   | #+TAGS: [ Project : {^P@.+} ]
>   `----
>
>   Searching for the tag Project will now list all tags also including
>   regular expression matches for ^P@.+. it is good, for example, if tags
>   for a certain project are tagged with a common project-identifier, i.e.
>   P@2014_OrgTags.

This seems an interesting addition.

> - Nesting grouptags. Allowing subtags to be defined as groups
>   themselves.
>
>   ,----
>   | #+TAGS: [ Group : SubOne(1) SubTwo ]
>   | #+TAGS: [ SubOne : SubOne1 SubOne2 ]
>   | #+TAGS: [ SubTwo : SubTwo1 SubTwo2 ]
>   `----
>
>   Should be seen as a tree of tags:
>   - Group
>     - SubOne
>       - SubOne1
>       - SubOne2
>     - SubTwo
>       - SubTwo1
>       - SubTwo2
>   Searching for "Group" should return all tags defined above.

OK.

>   A new variable is defined `ORG-GROUP-TAGS-MAX-DEPTH' that is used to
>   limit the depth of recursion when expanding tags. It defaults to 2.

I don't think this variable is necessary. However, a check for circular
inclusions would be necessary.


Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou