[Orgmode] Re: Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
Hello, I think there are two possible interpretations of 'priority', /importance/ and /urgency/. It is up to the user which is preferred. You propose the interpretation as urgency: I have to do that thing today/this week/sometime. Importance may come into play with your daily decision, what to do next. The advantage of this approach is the better quantifiability of 'urgency'. At the moment in org-mode you have to opt for one interpretation. But with the fresh and cool property feature in org-mode it should be possible to incorporate both aspects together. Somehow. Just a thought, though. Greetings, Stephan Piotr Zielinski wrote: Hi. I'd like to find out how different people use priorities (#A, #B, ...) in org-mode. I've always assumed the standard interpretation (#A = high priority, #B = medium, #C = low). However, the problem with this approach is that what high priority means is not well defined, and if you are not careful, then all your items will quickly become high priority, which defeats the whole point. I've been recently experimenting with a different interpretation of priorities: #B = tasks to do today, #C = tasks to do this week, #D = all the rest, default. #A is reserved at the moment. One good thing about this system is a clearer interpretation of priorities. Another is that it separates the action of inserting new items into your todo list and that of assigning a particular priority to them. In particular, at the beginning of each day, you can look at your list of todos/deadlines/scheduled, and pick a few to complete on that day by giving them the #B priority. At any time of the day, the agenda will show you these #B items clearly separated from the rest. Previously, I had to do a mental rescanning of the agenda items each time I was wondering what do I have to do now, which was rather stressful. Of course, I've tried this only for a couple of days, so my conclusions might be completely bogus. Maybe there is a better way than priorities to mark items as to complete today. I'd definitely like to know what others think about it. ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
[Orgmode] iCalendar export does not honor the ' org-agenda-default-appointment-duration' setting (v5.04)
Hi, I have set the default appointment duration for the events with only a start date/time to be 60 mins. This works perfectly well in the Agenda view; however, the iCalendar exported events still use 2 hours as the duration for the event. The function which is causing this seems to be 'org-ical-ts-to-string' whose doc. String clearly mentions that 2 hours are added. Can this duration be based on the 'org-agenda-default-appointment-duration' if that variable is set? Thanks! Anupam ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Integration of Org mode and mairix
Bastien [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Xiao-Yong Jin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Probably it's the time for us to think of a universal way to support system dependent 3rd party index tools. Mairix may not be the only search tool people want to use with org-mode, though it is my favourite and only index tool I use for now. Please see (and comment) my suggestion here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/2563 I think that's basically right, though in the case of email search, probably the best thing would be making nnir work right (and provide nnir with a mairix backend). nnir is supposed to provide a layer of indirection between mail indexers and gnus, which should be enough for org-mode needs. -- +---+ | Jason F. McBrayer[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | If someone conquers a thousand times a thousand others in | | battle, and someone else conquers himself, the latter one | | is the greatest of all conquerors. --- The Dhammapada| ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
Piotr Zielinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd like to find out how different people use priorities (#A, #B, ...) in org-mode. I've always assumed the standard interpretation (#A = high priority, #B = medium, #C = low). However, the problem with this approach is that what high priority means is not well defined, and if you are not careful, then all your items will quickly become high priority, which defeats the whole point. I don't really use priorities at all, since I'm using org-mode to do GTD. If something has to be done today, then that's a deadline, not a priority. If I don't need or want to get something done /in the next week/, it probably shouldn't be crowding up my todo-lists at all, and making it harder for me to find things I should be doing; it should be on my someday/maybe list. -- +---+ | Jason F. McBrayer[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | If someone conquers a thousand times a thousand others in | | battle, and someone else conquers himself, the latter one | | is the greatest of all conquerors. --- The Dhammapada| ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
[Orgmode] Re: Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
Hi, Maybe I'm not that smart here... But what is actually the difference between using: *priorities and: *Using tags You could make tags like this: Urgent Tomorow Low etc... Ciao, Renzo ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Re: Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
On 01/08/07, Renzo Been [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But what is actually the difference between using: *priorities and: *Using tags That's a very good point. The reason why I decided to use priorities was because it was easier to make them work with org-agenda. In particular, I don't know how to make the agenda display, for example, all headlines without the :today: tag in the order of increasing deadlines. If this is possible, I'll happily switch to tags. Any ideas? Thanks, Piotr ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
On 01/08/07, Jason F. McBrayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't really use priorities at all, since I'm using org-mode to do GTD. I agree with you on that, I was only suggesting using priorities as a technical means to label certain tasks as to do today in a way which is easy in org-mode. If something has to be done today, then that's a deadline, not a priority. As I said, my reason for scheduling certain tasks as for today, is that I like to have a plan of what to do each day. Without an explicit plan, I catch myself scanning my todo list many times during a day, effectively wasting time on recreating the same plan many times. But I've tried it only for a week now, so I can't say whether it works. Thanks, Piotr ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Re: Interpretation of priorities in org-mode
Piotr Zielinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The reason why I decided to use priorities was because it was easier to make them work with org-agenda. In particular, I don't know how to make the agenda display, for example, all headlines without the :today: tag in the order of increasing deadlines. If this is possible, I'll happily switch to tags. This search should be achieved with a custom command like: (setq org-agenda-custom-commands '((u tags -today ((org-agenda-sorting-strategy '(time-up)) See (info (org)Setting Options) ... but i can't have the '(time-up) option to be taken into account. At least it works for selecting all but the :today: tag. -- Bastien ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Re: [Orgmode] Integration of Org mode and mairix
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason F. McBrayer) writes: Please see (and comment) my suggestion here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/2563 I think that's basically right, though in the case of email search, probably the best thing would be making nnir work right (and provide nnir with a mairix backend). Yes, that would be even better. Although I think we could have both: a org-gnus-links-prefer-nnir option (and mairix or namazu or swish-e ... being called by nnir.el) *and* a org-custom-link-types (if one want to store links from within, say, a man page.) -- Bastien ___ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
