From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Stegemann Subject: Re: Counter cookies and mixed checkbox lists/subtasks Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:05:19 +0200 Message-ID: References: <7F5AF424-5413-44D5-A73C-A4BA6B9FB5F9@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LuNXW-0007Qv-K7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 05:05:46 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LuNXQ-0007Ps-Ba for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 05:05:44 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46234 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LuNXQ-0007Ph-0M for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 05:05:40 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:37491 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LuNXP-0005Am-9p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 05:05:39 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1LuNXN-0004wy-Jz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:05:37 +0000 Received: from london.zeitform.net ([146.140.213.100]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:05:37 +0000 Received: from ulf-news by london.zeitform.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:05:37 +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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Carsten, Carsten Dominik wrote: > there is no way currently to force a cookie either way. > > I think the the right solution is to modify the structure, so > that the check boxes are only in entries without children. > Seems to me that this is always possible - in your case > you could just create a "first child" that gets the checkboxes. okay, as said, this is rather a minor annoyance. However, fixing this might nevertheless be desirable since the combination of checkboxes and todo item is quite powerful. Imagine you are compiling a document where you need contributions from others. You could make a todo item for this with checkboxes for every chapter planned (or for every author you expect input from, or ...). As soon as contributions from authors arrive, you create todo items preferably below the same initial todo item, indicating that you have to integrate input. When compiling the document you finish those todo items on the one hand and on the other hand checkboxes will eventually get checked as chapters are finished. Although putting the chapter checkboxes into its own sub-item is possible, much of the simplicity and elegance of the original approach gets lost. What do you think? Ulf