+1. This is how I do it as well. This approach makes it easier to not only see what tasks have been assigned to what people, it also provides a way to generate a custom agenda (report) showing what tasks each has and what the state is for each task.
Tim Karl Voit <devn...@karl-voit.at> writes: > * Christian Egli <christian.e...@sbs.ch> wrote: >> >> The idea is that you use type todos using the people involved at the >> meeting. Below is an example how this could look: >> >> ``` org >> #+title: Meeting minutes >> >> #+TYP_TODO: Fred Sara Lucy Mike | DONE > > I'd challenge the decisions on using TODO keywords for people > although the Org manual also suggests to do so. > > TODO keywords are single classification. This means that you are not > able to assign more than one person to a task. I'm using @tags for > the same purpose which allows me to assign tasks to more than one > person and keep TODO keywords independent to the person. For > example, when you resolve a task, you lose the information who was > assigned to the task. > > Therefore, I'd use: > > * Meeting > > ** TODO Prepare the demo :@Fred: > ** STARTED Contact customer :@Sara: > ** TODO Work on the document :@Fred:@Lucy:@Mike: > > More on that on > https://karl-voit.at/2019/09/25/categories-versus-tags/ including an > elisp snippet I'm using to filter according to @name-tags. > > YMMV. HTH. -- Tim Cross
