Re: Remember and then refile

[Steven Lumos <steven@lumos.us>]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> On Jan 18, 2008, at 11:19 PM, Steven Lumos wrote:
>
>> Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
>>> On Jan 18, 2008, at 9:40 PM, Steven Lumos wrote:
>>>
>>>> Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>> This will be in 5.19.  Thanks for the proposal!.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Carsten
>>>>
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> Have you considered somehow merging the tree selection and
>>>> minibuffer
>>>> with completion methods so that both are available simultaneously?
>>>
>>> Could you please be more specific?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> - Carsten
>>
>> Maybe. :-)
>>
>> Currently, C-u C-c C-c in remember uses this "Select a destination
>> location for the note" mode where you navigate the org tree in the
>> usual way and then RET to select a headline.
>>
>> On the other hand, org-refile uses the minibuffer and you type a
>> headline, with completion and history.
>>
>> So recently I've been thinking it should be possible (though only
>> arguably desirable) to allow both of these modes to be active at once,
>> so movement commands would navigate the tree and typing commands would
>> append to the minibuffer.
>>
>> There are key conflicts that need to be worked out, but I think it
>> could be done.  For one example, TAB could do completion if there is
>> text in the minibuffer, and tree navigation otherwise.
>
> Hmm, this sound like over-complx to me.  I would use the interface
> that makes sense most of the time and then move by hand in the
> remaining cases.  Or do you think tat the interface you want
> is dependent on the template you are using?
>
> - Carsten

That could be.  I'm still very much figuring out what the interface
between my brain and org looks like, and not currently using any of
the established planning styles.  I've only been using the agenda for
about half as long as I've been using org for example.

From my perspective, I saw two methods to do exactly the same thing(*),
which led to thinking about the advantages of each, which led to
thinking why not just merge them and have the advantages of both.

(*) Maybe this assumption was wrong?

Steve