[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Emacs-orgmode] Re: org-mode usage patterns
[Emacs-orgmode] Re: org-mode usage patterns
Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:54:10 -0400
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)
As a relatively new org user, I have been wanting to see a discussion
of usage patterns and file structures. So, I'm glad you asked, and
perhaps this will help get people talking.
Here's a little about my org usage patterns. This isn't complete
because I've only been using org less than a week. However, I have
imported a fair amount of material into my orgfiles, from previous
usage of Planner and Howm. So, I have had to make decisions about how
to structure things.
I keep one topic per file, called ~/org/Topic.org . All my org files
are together in the ~/org folder. The filename is the default category
for TODO items, so this is quite useful. Since I keep org-agenda-files
list in alphabetical order, my tasks are grouped in alphabetical order
by file when I look in the Global TODO list (C-c a t.)
I have org-agenda-include-all-todo set to "nil". I don't like all the
open tasks cluttering up my agenda. Instead, when I want to see a list
of all open TODO, I use the Global TODO list.
I don't put timestamps of any kind in a TODO until I'm ready to
SCHEDULE it. I use C-c C-s to add a schedule timestamp.
In this way, it's easy to use (C-c a t) to find open tasks to
schedule, and easy to see what's scheduled for today with org-agenda
(C-c a a).
I mix tasks and notes. I often have ideas about a task or perhaps a
phone number or address, so I put those under the TODO heading. For
example if the headline says "TODO Implement feature X" I will often
have several ideas about the shape of the feature, and possibly
alternative implementation possibilities. I'll usually drop these in
as subheadings to the TODO, but these aren't TODO items in
themselves---the headlines are useful for organizing ideas, but it's
usually too early at this stage to make the headings into TODO. Once
the ideas and notes have coalesced into a more definite plan, the
headings start to become TODOs.
In addition, when writing a structured document with Org, I will use
TODO headings simply to mark that a section needs filling in.
When I want to really focus on a particular project that has multiple
open TODOs, I hide the agenda buffer and just display the particular
project's .org file, usually in OVERVIEW mode. This hides all the
little notes, but shows all the TODO and gives me quick access to any
part of the file.
I try to keep TODO's in logical/temporal order when maintaining a .org
file, so this view usually gives me an idea what the NEXTACTION should
be. It's simple enough to navigate to that, and hit C-c C-s to
schedule those for today.
I use only TODO and DONE as keywords. I try to make todo items small
enough so that they're either TODO or DONE. I never found much use for
the "in progress" marking of Planner Mode. Who knows, this may change
in the future.
I haven't found as much use for Remember mode yet. I usually just add
stuff where it needs to go, but perhaps when things are busier I will
really want to be able to "braindump" to Remember.org and then
file things away later. I have also thought about using Remember for
journal entries / blogging (as described in the manual.)
I haven't yet used Tags because I categorize things by placing them in
the file for that topic.
I have more to say on the subject of org usage, but I want to develop
my ideas a little further first.
"Piotr Zielinski" <address@hidden> writes:
> It seems that different people use TODOs in different ways. For
> example, I use TODOs at the very lowest possible level to indicate the
> next action in a particular project. That said, I'd welcome some
> hierarchical propagation of TODO, as it is with tags. One can imagine
> using two kinds of todos: TODO and NEXTACTION. TODO would be attached
> to (high-level) projects I'm currently interested in doing, whereas
> NEXTACTION attached to the low-level nodes of the tree that correspond
> to the next physical action to take. The agenda could be configured
> in such a way to display only these NEXTACTIONs that have an ancestor
> marked as TODO. Note that this is already possible with tags. Is it
> sensible to make org.el treat TODOs as a any other tag?
> To make most of org-mode, I think it would be very useful to compare
> how people actually use it. I'm sure I could learn a lot of useful
> things from such an exchange, and would be surprised by the variety of
> organizing structures people use. The best way to achieve that is
> probably to post deprivatized sample parts of our .org files with a
> short explanation. What place do you think is the best: this email
> list? some wiki? something else?
> On 26/04/06, Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Apr 26, 2006, at 8:54, Christian Egli wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 18:19 +0200, Frank Ruell wrote:
>> >> The only thing I've missed was an option for items, which are
>> >> fontyfied
>> >> and checkable via some shortcut, but never ever show up in agenda (or
>> >> rather clutter up your agenda).
>> > What would be a use case for that? I have been thinking I would not
>> > want
>> > to see TODO items in the agenda that for the following scenario:
>> > * TODO Organize event
>> > ** TODO Choose a date
>> > ** TODO Invite people
>> > Here I'd like my agenda to remind me only that I need to Organize the
>> > event. I'd like to be able to check of the subtasks (which I'll do in
>> > the org-mode buffer, not in the agenda), but I do not want them to
>> > "clutter" my agenda.
>> Interesting idea. I could make an option which would stop searching
>> for TODO in the subtree below a TODO entry.
>> - Carsten
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list