From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: bug? org does not seem to sort by prioritiy #A, #B, #C, #D Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:01:18 +0200 Message-ID: References: <5018244D-6882-44E3-BE5A-F7ADFD68CA78@gmail.com> <4CBFE7D9.7060406@diplan.de> <8149C452-8C07-4458-AE99-73717076A134@gmail.com> <4CBFEC31.5060008@diplan.de> <4CBFFF5D.2010604@diplan.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59167 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P8r5i-0006eM-Mb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:05:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8r1W-0003vw-1F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:01:23 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:35039) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1P8r1V-0003vY-Q2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:01:21 -0400 Received: by ewy5 with SMTP id 5so2933150ewy.0 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 02:01:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4CBFFF5D.2010604@diplan.de> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Rainer Stengele Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:52 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: > Am 21.10.2010 09:39, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >> >> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >> >>> Am 21.10.2010 09:21, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>>> >>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:12 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am 21.10.2010 09:07, schrieb Carsten Dominik: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Rainer Stengele wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> maybe this is a bug: (Org-mode version 7.01trans >>>>>>> (release_7.01h.605.gc540) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Having set >>>>>>> >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> ================================================================ >>>>>>> Org Enable Priority Commands: Hide Value Toggle on (non-nil) >>>>>>> State: STANDARD. >>>>>>> Non-nil means priority commands are active. Hide Rest >>>>>>> When nil, these commands will be disabled, so that you never >>>>>>> accidentally >>>>>>> set a priority. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Org Highest Priority: Hide Value A >>>>>>> State: STANDARD. >>>>>>> The highest priority of TODO items. A character like ?A, ?B >>>>>>> etc. More >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Org Lowest Priority: Hide Value D >>>>>>> State: SAVED and set. >>>>>>> The lowest priority of TODO items. A character like ?A, ?B >>>>>>> etc. More >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Org Default Priority: Hide Value D >>>>>>> State: SAVED and set. >>>>>>> The default priority of TODO items. More >>>>>>> >>>>>>> resulting correctly in >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (custom-set-variables >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> '(org-highest-priority 65) >>>>>>> '(org-default-priority 68) >>>>>>> '(org-lowest-priority 68) >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> = >>>>>>> ================================================================ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> the custom agenda command >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ("Tp" "all todos sorted by prio" >>>>>>> ( >>>>>>> (alltodo "all todos" )) >>>>>>> ((org-agenda-sorting-strategy '(priority-down)))) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> will sort correctly by priorities #A, #B, #C, descending, >>>>>>> but will then mix up the rest of the todos with "#D" or >>>>>>> without priority. >>>>>>> "#D" does not seem to be included in the sorting. >>>>>> >>>>>> The meaning of the default priority is that tasks without a >>>>>> priority do have >>>>>> the default priority. If you need 4 priorities all higher than >>>>>> "normal tasks", >>>>>> make E your lowest and default priority >>>>>> >>>>>> - Carsten >>>>>> >>>>> Yes, works now. A bit counterintuitive, isn't it? >>>> >>>> What would be the "intuitive" meaning of default priority then? >>>> >>>> - Carsten >>> Well, I would have expected that if I define a priority #D as >>> lowest priority it is not excluded from sorting. >> >> >> It *is* included in the sorting. All #D's come after the #A's, >> #B's, and #C's. Only that "all #D's" includes all entries that >> have no specified priority. Within each main priority, the precise >> order of the entries is determined by other >> factors well, like if it is a deadline or an overdue scheduled >> item..... That make the D's look random and the other not - but >> the same is going on everywhere. >> >> You can look at the computed priority (which is used for sorting) >> by pressing (I think) "P" on every item. >> >> Would you like to make a proposal for a paragraph in the manual to >> clarify this? Or are you proposing to change how this works? >> >> >> >> - Carsten >> > My guessing is that a naive user (like me ...) does expect any > defined priority (like #D in this case) to have a higher priority > than a "non" priority item. I see how that makes sense. However, the other use case is this: Use #A to make something higher priority. Use #C to make it lower than any normal stuff. All the rest mingles in #B. So your proposal makes the assumption that any priority means more than no priority. - Carsten