From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Random tag-related thoughts Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:45:09 +0100 Message-ID: <87ac2icrp6.fsf@tallis.ilo.ucl.ac.uk> References: <87fycbnike.fsf@tallis.ilo.ucl.ac.uk> <3ee6ff63d5cbf764c48423de546d4a33@science.uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GnhhT-0004og-Kj for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:31:07 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GnhhR-0004lu-Ap for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:31:06 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GnhhQ-0004lT-1A for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:31:04 -0500 Received: from [199.232.41.67] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1GnhhO-00035e-K1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:31:03 -0500 Received: from [213.36.80.91] (helo=mail.libertysurf.net) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GnD56-00018o-8p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 06:49:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: <3ee6ff63d5cbf764c48423de546d4a33@science.uva.nl> (Carsten Dominik's message of "Thu\, 23 Nov 2006 11\:54\:05 +0100") 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: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Carsten Dominik writes: > You could use org-occur for doing something like this: > > C-c / :tag.: RET Right - but we don't have agenda functionnalities. > (defun my-org-tag-range-tree (arg base n1 n2)) Yes, it does the right job! Many thanks. >> What about [ tag1 tag2 (tag)] for grouping tags - "(tag)" being the >> tag-name of the group (i.e. matching all tags in this group)? > > I have seen this request before (I think from Tim). But you could > also define custom searches for that list of tags. Still, this > remains an interesting idea. Maybe the most useful feature is to allow for regexp matching when doing a tag/todo query in the agenda buffer. Regards, -- Bastien