[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Orgmode] property searches for #+CATEGORY
From: |
Bastien |
Subject: |
Re: [Orgmode] property searches for #+CATEGORY |
Date: |
Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:16:26 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) Emacs/23.0.0 (gnu/linux) |
Adam Spiers <address@hidden> writes:
>> This would let you restrict any agenda search to a group of agenda
>> files. I don't want to digg too far in this direction, but I think
>> there are a few other things for which such groups might be useful
>> (e.g. publish agenda files per group...)
>
> Well, the documentation says
>
> The category is a broad label assigned to each agenda item. By
> default, the category is simply derived from the file name, [...]
>
> so I thought this use case was pretty much exactly what it was
> intended for.
Lets say that #+CATEGORY is more oriented toward files grouping, and
:CATEGORY: is more oriented toward tasks grouping. In fact, when using
several #+CATEGORY in the same file (as it is *not* recommended to do),
you are virtually splitting your file into several files, each of them
corresponding to a category.
Your request was to be able to perform a search using #+CATEGORY as a
way to search through multiple files.
I can see to ways of doing this:
1. implicitely add the #+CATEGORY value of a file to each entry in this
file, and search through files having the same #+CATEGORY;
2. clearly separate the group of files from the group of tasks, and
perform a group-restricted search.
I think (1) is problematic: what if a file has a top #+CATEGORY and
several :CATEGORY: properties? What about precedence and inheritance?
How to build the search string if we want to search through several
:CATEGORY: properties in a single #+CATEGORY ?
> No, I don't think it's #+CATEGORY per se which is only there for
> backward compatibility - it's using it multiple times within a single
> file.
The fact that only *one* instance of #+CATEGORY is allowed in a file
calls itself for the divorce between #+CATEGORY (possibly renamed as
#+GROUP) and the :CATEGORY: property...
>> It's not that easy for users to understand how to user categories,
>> and staying with two ways of setting them might be confusing IMO.
>
> Surely this is an argument against introducing yet another grouping
> mechanism! We already have tags, properties, and categories.
But a category is just a property, even if the search interface raises
this property above others. And besides these search considerations, I
really believe that having several groups of agenda-files would help.
> I already have too many problems keeping a good work/life balance! ;-)
Com'on, our daily brain-sport is to feed this list! :)
--
Bastien