From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard G Riley Subject: Re: switching between todo groups Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2007 16:15:23 +0100 Message-ID: References: <7qir4l4ghj.fsf@home.net> <877il0d7gw.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <874pg4bqah.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <873avor1i9.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87hck38l2b.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <874pg38jel.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87r6j772wo.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> 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 1IoKig-0005K7-QM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:15:30 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IoKif-0005J0-Ao for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:15:30 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IoKif-0005Iu-62 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:15:29 -0400 Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.189]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IoKie-0007Rl-MI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:15:28 -0400 Received: by fk-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 19so2035936fkr for ; Sat, 03 Nov 2007 08:15:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87r6j772wo.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> (Bastien's message of "Sat\, 03 Nov 2007 15\:40\:55 +0000") 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: Bastien Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Bastien writes: > Richard G Riley writes: > >>> Hey you mentionned in your first email that the manual explicitely said >>> the two sets should have different keywords, so "bug" is a bit too much >>> here :-) >> >> You misunderstand. When you try to switch it says "1/2" but wont >> switch. It should not recognise the second if you cant switch to it I >> think. > > So your proposal is to ignore the second set if it is not well > defined? Yes. I was confused for a while as to why I couldn't select the second set. Or maybe no. But let the user know why they cant be used. It might be even better to really allow the selection. The next state change must be preceeded by a sequence selection each and every time if you are not wanting to use the default (first) sequence. That would make sense to me too. > > Maybe this would be even more confusing for the user: having 1/2 in the > echo-area and not being able to get 2/2 makes you wonder what is wrong > with the second set... what you precisely did. If the second set is > simply ignored, then the user will be tempted to make Org know about > it rather than fixing it. > >>> Would you use this? >> >> Probably not as my initial query was more interest than anything else > > :-) > >> and I don't know what TYP_TODO is off the top of my head:-; > > Org used to handle the cycling through SEQ_TODO and TYP_TODO keywords > differently -- looks like it's not the case anymore...