Re: [O] Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies?

I don't think you are missing anything. Your first example leverages inheritance (and you can turn that off if you don't want it), and your second example doesn't. In any case, the order of the tags is irrelevant. To me the real question is what do you want to use them for? I use them in

Re: [O] Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies?

So a left-to-right listing of (colon-separated) tags after the heading cannot imply a higher-to-lower hierarchical order? So there is no hierarchy unless you create it, e.g., (setq org-tag-alist '((:startgrouptag) ("GTD") (:grouptags)

Re: [O] Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies?

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:30 AM John Kitchin wrote: > I was not aware of any implied hierarchy with tags. The order is not > important as far as I know, and what you describe as mix-and-match seems > ok. There is an idea of inheritance, e.g. sub-headings can inherit tags

Re: [O] Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies?

I was not aware of any implied hierarchy with tags. The order is not important as far as I know, and what you describe as mix-and-match seems ok. There is an idea of inheritance, e.g. sub-headings can inherit tags from higher headings. In any case, you should be able to use agenda queries to find

[O] Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies?

Is it possible to have two or more tags that are "peers," i.e., all equal, not in a hierarchy, be in an ad-hoc, as-needed way be hierarchical? For example, I have the tags *org-mode, lisp, *and *emacs, *and I want to have a header with the tags * my header:emacs:org-mode:lisp: So the above