"Jacob S. Gordon" <[email protected]> writes: >>> #+OPTIONS: pri:t >>> #+PRIORITIES: 1 3 2 >>> * TODO [#5] Task >>> * TODO [#2] Task > > Even though there’s no ambiguity about the limits, you could argue > the intermediate buffer is still invalid (e.g., fails ‘org-lint’).
Invalid Org buffers do not exist :) Any plain text buffer is a valid Org buffer. The only question is whether an Org buffer expresses what the user wants to express. But in the above example, there is an ambiguity - does the user really want to use 1-5 priority range? Or is it 1-3 and the incompatibility is overlooked? Or maybe #1, #2, #3 in one buffer should be transformed into #1, #3, and #5 with priorities changing to 1,2,3,4,5? There is no general answer to this question other than asking user to be more specific. In the current state, Org uses a very simple approach to resolve ambiguities - first keyword "wins". Another way it doing something more sophisticated, but IMHO even very sophisticated handing of multiple keywords will still run into edge cases and do something other than what user wants. Yet, too complex defaults may also confuse users. So, I'd rather keep the defaults simple unless we can justify going into complications. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
