Re: bug? org does not seem to sort by prioritiy #A, #B, #C, #D

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

On Oct 21, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:

>
> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote:
>>
>>> My guessing is that a naive user (like me ...) does expect any
>>> defined priority (like #D in this case) to have a higher priority
>>> than a "non" priority item.
>>
>> I see how that makes sense.  However, the other use case is this:
>>
>> Use #A to make something higher priority.  Use #C to make it lower
>> than any normal stuff.  All the rest mingles in #B.
>>
>> So your proposal makes the assumption that any priority means more
>> than no priority.
>
> The default aBc settings were easily understandable to me and I use  
> A to
> mark things high and C low and leave most things in the middle.
>
> So maybe all that's needed is a "You might expect tasks with an  
> explicit
> priority to all be considered higher priority than tasks without an
> explicit priority, but in fact unlabeled tasks inherit the default
> priority."  Or maybe that's redundant.

I just re-read the manual section.  As far as I can see, all necessary
information is there.

- Carsten