From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lawrence Bottorff Subject: Re: Ad-hoc, mix-and-match tag hierarchies? Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 14:45:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114148c87b3adf05642bd591" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47233) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehMJi-0003Rx-L8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 16:23:52 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehMHF-0002qA-Qr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 16:21:19 -0500 Received: from mail-ot0-x241.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::241]:33622) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ehKnI-0000a5-C0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 14:45:12 -0500 Received: by mail-ot0-x241.google.com with SMTP id q9so7089368oti.0 for ; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 11:45:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Kaushal Modi Cc: emacs-orgmode Mailinglist , John Kitchin --001a114148c87b3adf05642bd591 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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) ("Control") ("Persp") ... -- is what I'm hearing. What I meant to do is to be able to use tags alone or together. And when used together, to somehow imply hierarchy. So if I have * header 1 :emacs: ** header 1.1 :orgmode: *** header 1.1.1 :lisp: stuff about Emacs' org-mode's lisp code this implies subject hierarchy simply from the headers' hierarchy. However this * header 1 :emacs: stuff about Emacs * header 2 :emacs:orgmode:lisp stuff about Emacs' org-mode's lisp code * header 3 :lisp: stuff about just Common Lisp * header 4 :emacs:orgmode: stuff about Emacs' org-mode * header 5 :emacs: more stuff about Emacs is all peers header-wise, while the tags (if using left-to-right listing to mean higher to lower in hierarchy) tell us the depth level of specialization of a topic. The first set of headers is relying (clumsily) on the header level to indicate depth of specialization, which is not always realistic. If I wanted, ad-hoc, to indicate levels of some hierarchy with tags, that is, not be forced to create empty superior headers, it seems there's no prescribed way to do this. And creating tag hierarchies by hand, i.e., (setq org-tag-alist '((:startgrouptag)..., makes me play the combinatorics game of imagining all different possible hierarchy combinations. Or am I missing something? On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Kaushal Modi wrote: > 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 >> from higher headings. >> > > Same here. > > >> I am not sure about the org-mode tag. >> > > "-" is an invalid tag character.. the tag can be "org_mode", but not > "org-mode". Last time I tried using hyphen, I remember that the tag > auto-alignment would stop working (C-u C-c C-q) and also the tag face won't > be applied. > > @Lawrence: > > You can have tag inheritance this way: > > * Emacs :emacs: > Emacs stuff > ** Lisp :lisp: > Emacs lisp stuff here > *** Org :org_mode: > Emacs + Lisp + Org mode stuff > ** Org :org_mode: > Emacs + Org mode stuff (but not lisp) > -- > > Kaushal Modi > --001a114148c87b3adf05642bd591 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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.,=C2=A0

(setq or= g-tag-alist '((:startgrouptag)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0("GTD&qu= ot;)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 (:grouptags)
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ("Control")
= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 ("Persp") ...

-- is what I'= ;m hearing.

What I meant to do is to be able to use tags= alone or together. And when used together, to somehow imply hierarchy. So = if I have

* header 1=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 :emacs:

** header 1.1=C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0:orgmode:

*** header 1.1.1=C2=A0 =C2= =A0:lisp:
stuff about Emacs' org-mode's lisp code

this implies subject hierarchy simply from the headers= 9; hierarchy. However this

* header 1=C2=A0 =C2=A0= :emacs:
stuff about Emacs
* header 2=C2=A0 :emacs:orgmo= de:lisp
stuff about Emacs' org-mode's lisp code
=
* header 3 :lisp:
stuff about just Common Lisp
* h= eader 4 :emacs:orgmode:
stuff about Emacs' org-mode
* header 5=C2=A0 :emacs:
more stuff about Emacs

is all peers header-wise, while the tags (if using left-to-right l= isting to mean higher to lower in hierarchy) tell us the depth level of spe= cialization of a topic. The first set of headers is relying (clumsily) on t= he header level to indicate depth of specialization, which is not always re= alistic. If I wanted, ad-hoc, to indicate levels of some hierarchy with tag= s, that is, not be forced to create empty superior headers, it seems=C2=A0 = there's no prescribed way to do this. And creating tag hierarchies by h= and, i.e.,=C2=A0(setq org-tag-alist '((:startgrouptag)..., makes me pla= y the combinatorics game of imagining all different possible hierarchy comb= inations. Or am I missing something?

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:36 AM, Kaush= al Modi <kaushal.modi@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:30 AM John Kitchin <jkitchin@andrew.c= mu.edu> wrote:
I was not aware of any implied hierarchy with tags. The order is not im= portant 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 hi= gher headings.

Same here.
= =C2=A0
I am not sure about the org-mode tag.

"-" is an invalid tag character.. the ta= g can be "org_mode", but not "org-mode". Last time I tr= ied using hyphen, I remember that the tag auto-alignment would stop working= (C-u C-c C-q) and also the tag face won't be applied.

@Lawrence:

You can have tag inheritance this way:
* Emacs :emacs:
Emacs stuff
** Lis= p :lisp:
Emacs lisp stuff here
*** Org :org_mode:
=
Emacs + Lisp + Org mode stuff
** Org :org_mode:
Emacs + Org mode stuff (but not = lisp)
--

Kaushal Modi


--001a114148c87b3adf05642bd591--