add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

[Xebar Saram]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 409 bytes --]

Hi!

I have this current capture

(add-to-list 'org-capture-templates '("bb" "Work.TODO" entry (file+headline
(concat pmm "/org/files/agenda/bgu.org") "TDEN") "* TODO %^G %? :@work:
\n%^T"
))

which seems to work by adding a tag (via the %^G) alongside the current
already defined tag in the capture template.

is there anyway to add a tag to the current tag in the capture template
(:@work: above).

Thx!

Z

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 611 bytes --]

Re: add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

[Adam Porter]

Xebar Saram <zeltakc@gmail.com> writes:

> is there anyway to add a tag to the current tag in the capture template (:@work: above).

Hey Z,

Sorry, I don't understand the question.  Can you clarify what you mean?

Re: add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

[Xebar Saram]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 756 bytes --]

Hi and thx for the response

the issues is that it dosent seem to add an additional tag to the already
defined tag list in the capture (:@work: ) but instead add another :TAG:
field apart from the already existing tag field. so the final result looks
like this:

** TODO TEST  :@work:                     :TAG:

while i expect the %^G capture to add to the existing tag entry so it looks
like this

** TODO TEST                  :@work:TAG:

thx!

Z

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> wrote:

> Xebar Saram <zeltakc@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > is there anyway to add a tag to the current tag in the capture template
> (:@work: above).
>
> Hey Z,
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the question.  Can you clarify what you mean?
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1817 bytes --]

Re: add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

[Adam Porter]

Xebar Saram <zeltakc@gmail.com> writes:

> the issues is that it dosent seem to add an additional tag to the already defined tag list in the capture (:@work: ) but instead add another :TAG: field
> apart from the already existing tag field. so the final result looks like this:
>
> ** TODO TEST :@work: :TAG:
>
> while i expect the %^G capture to add to the existing tag entry so it looks like this
>
> ** TODO TEST :@work:TAG:

Hey Z,

I understand now.  Yes, that happens because org-capture-fill-template
inserts the tag text manually, like this:

#+BEGIN_SRC elisp
(let* ((org-last-tags-completion-table
        (org-global-tags-completion-table
         (cond ((equal key "G") (org-agenda-files))
               (file (list file))
               (t nil))))
       (org-add-colon-after-tag-completion t)
       (ins (mapconcat
             #'identity
             (org-split-string
              (completing-read
               (if prompt (concat prompt ": ") "Tags: ")
               'org-tags-completion-function nil nil nil
               'org-tags-history)
              "[^[:alnum:]_@#%]+")
             ":")))
  (when (org-string-nw-p ins)
    (unless (eq (char-before) ?:) (insert ":"))
    (insert ins)
    (unless (eq (char-after) ?:) (insert ":"))
    (and (org-at-heading-p)
         (let ((org-ignore-region t))
           (org-set-tags nil 'align)))))
#+END_SRC

It would be simple to have it use org-set-tags-to instead of inserting
them manually.  I guess that would be correct in the vast majority of
cases, however IIUC it would be a change in functionality, as the %^G
could be put anywhere in the template and insert tags there (which seems
like a strange thing to do, but you never know).  On the other hand, it
seems like what you're asking for would be the more expected
functionality, in which case this would be a bug fix.  So maybe the
maintainers would accept a patch for that, or maybe not...  :)

Re: add additional tag (using %^G) to existing tag in org capture

[Nicolas Goaziou]

Hello,

Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes:

> Xebar Saram <zeltakc@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> the issues is that it dosent seem to add an additional tag to the already defined tag list in the capture (:@work: ) but instead add another :TAG: field
>> apart from the already existing tag field. so the final result looks like this:
>>
>> ** TODO TEST :@work: :TAG:
>>
>> while i expect the %^G capture to add to the existing tag entry so it looks like this
>>
>> ** TODO TEST :@work:TAG:
>
> Hey Z,
>
> I understand now.  Yes, that happens because org-capture-fill-template
> inserts the tag text manually, like this:
>
> #+BEGIN_SRC elisp
> (let* ((org-last-tags-completion-table
>         (org-global-tags-completion-table
>          (cond ((equal key "G") (org-agenda-files))
>                (file (list file))
>                (t nil))))
>        (org-add-colon-after-tag-completion t)
>        (ins (mapconcat
>              #'identity
>              (org-split-string
>               (completing-read
>                (if prompt (concat prompt ": ") "Tags: ")
>                'org-tags-completion-function nil nil nil
>                'org-tags-history)
>               "[^[:alnum:]_@#%]+")
>              ":")))
>   (when (org-string-nw-p ins)
>     (unless (eq (char-before) ?:) (insert ":"))
>     (insert ins)
>     (unless (eq (char-after) ?:) (insert ":"))
>     (and (org-at-heading-p)
>          (let ((org-ignore-region t))
>            (org-set-tags nil 'align)))))
> #+END_SRC
>
> It would be simple to have it use org-set-tags-to instead of inserting
> them manually.  I guess that would be correct in the vast majority of
> cases, however IIUC it would be a change in functionality, as the %^G
> could be put anywhere in the template and insert tags there (which seems
> like a strange thing to do, but you never know).  On the other hand, it
> seems like what you're asking for would be the more expected
> functionality, in which case this would be a bug fix.  So maybe the
> maintainers would accept a patch for that, or maybe not...  :)

Either case sounds odd to me. As you point out, using `org-set-tags-to'
means "%^G" is no longer a placeholder, since the change is likely to
happen is some other location.

From a UI POV, turning "^%G" into a property, e.g., :ask-for-tags, could
make more sense.

WDYT?

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Goaziou