From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Dmitri Minaev" Subject: Re: Numeric Priorities (Was: Re: org priority cycling - removing priorities) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:14:26 +0500 Message-ID: References: <46E00294.6020403@calicojack.co.uk> <7fa8cbf49995c5cb1dbd0ff46f6cd81d@science.uva.nl> <87ps0rx65n.fsf_-_@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IZk1P-0006Sb-LO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:14:31 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IZk1N-0006Ri-4b for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:14:30 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IZk1N-0006Rd-2k for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:14:29 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IZk1M-00080P-Po for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 05:14:28 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so1163379nfh for ; Mon, 24 Sep 2007 02:14:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87ps0rx65n.fsf_-_@aka.i.naked.iki.fi> Content-Disposition: inline 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: Nuutti Kotivuori Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 9/9/07, Nuutti Kotivuori wrote: > And there wouldn't need to be any "highest" or "lowest" values for the > priorities. Also, I couldn't ever figure out why there needs to be a > way to specify the default priority explicitly (eg. [#B] vs. lines > that have none) - so I'd just vote for dropping that - no priority > listed if the priority is zero. > > This way I could always set some task on a higher priority if > necessary, or a lower one - and I'd only have problems if I need to > have something in between priorities (if we don't go for float values > ;)), but that should be easily solvable by a bit of preplanning or > just editing a few task priorities. Terve, Nuutti, I often use priorities, but I would rather call them some other way, since this name is somewhat misleading. For example, my reading diary has the following header: #+PRIORITIES: 1 9 5 and I rate the read books from 1 to 9. I leave the books unrated till I finish reading. So, to equal missing priority to a default priority would break this system. -- With best regards, Dmitri Minaev Russian history blog: http://minaev.blogspot.com