From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Edgington Subject: Re: proposal to have ignoreheading tags/properties Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 18:09:39 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <87k38m5903.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57901) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wv9Rq-0000Uv-29 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:10:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wv9Ri-0008Ch-Ic for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:10:01 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:45422) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Wv9Ri-0008Bw-BC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:09:54 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wv9Rg-0006Ob-EP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:09:52 +0200 Received: from 209.140.209.218 ([209.140.209.218]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:09:52 +0200 Received: from edgimar by 209.140.209.218 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 20:09:52 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Thorsten Jolitz gmail.com> writes: > > In a tree structure, when ignoring the parent node, it seems only > logical that the siblings are ignored too. > > You seem to use the wrong tool for the task (headlines), this looks like > a perfect use case for TAGS, i.e. define your (concept) groups as > tags. If these tags are not part of `org-export-exclude-tags' they won't > affect exporting, but you can still use them to build your agenda or a > sparse tree or so. > Why do you suppose this is the "wrong tool"? It is a quite natural and sensible tool, because it allows grouping, folding, and nesting collections of items together. I cannot do that with tags. If you don't like the idea of having a headline serve this purpose, then perhaps we can invent a new kind of "pseudo-headline" which behaves in this way. How would you propose to use tags alone to do something like the following which allows folding and unfolding the contents, without a lot of extra work? -- for example: * Chapters about Topic A :pseudo: ** Chapter 1 Title ** Chapter 2 Title * Chapters about Topic B :pseudo: ** Chapter 3 Title List of interesting things: *** items relevant to X :pseudo: - item 1 - item 2 - item 3 *** items relevant to Y :pseudo: - item 4 - item 5 Another example would be, say, if you wanted to divide up some kind of text-file (e.g. source code, or prose), dividing it into groupings that make sense to you, but not wanting to actually bring these changes into the document's exported structure. Here's an example of a letter: * Addresses / date :pseudo: 123 Cherry Lane City, ST 12345 October 5, 2014 Ms. Jane Doe Accounts Payable .... * Greeting :pseudo: Dear Ms. Johnson: * Body :pseudo: It has come to my attention that ...... * Closing :pseudo: Sincerely, John Doe * Postscript :pseudo: P.S. ..... Perhaps one could make it so that when a headline bullet (sequence) has a '#' character tacked on after the sequence, it is no longer a headline, but a "summary node" having the property that it promotes the levels of all its children. It doesn't much matter to me *how* one makes such a node, but I think the availability of nodes/headlines like this is important. In any case, it's not clear that this is "the wrong tool". I would use it, and for me (and presumably others) it would be the right (kind of) tool. Furthermore tags are limited by their brevity -- with a pseudo headline I can describe a concept or category with much more detail / clarity.