Re: [O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
Titus von der Malsburg malsb...@posteo.de writes: The reason why I think this would be useful is that some simple things are currently not possible. Consider the following document structure: * Office ** To do ** Finished * Home ** To do ** Finished If I want to archive things under the “Agenda/Finished,” there is no way to achieve this (correct me if I’m wrong). I could try this (setq org-archive-location ::** Finished) but that is ambiguous. It doesn’t indicate which of the two “Finished” nodes should be the target. Similar problems exist for refile targets: if I want to have the first “Finished” in my targets but not the second, how would I achieve that? None of the available facilities allows me to do this (without changing the document structure). Using the capture template way of specifying targets, both problems would be easy to solve because that mechanism allows me to specify the complete path in the document tree leading to the node of interest (among other things, file+regexp, etc.) Capture and Refile are two very different concepts. In the former, you define a static, or a set of static, accurate location that may not exist yet. In the latter, you pile up existing locations that you filter interactively, depending on the situation. In your example above, it is possible to refile under any Finished headline by choosing the right path. Archiving may indeed lack a way to specify a full path in a document. But supporting the full capture template elements doesn't make sense either. You cannot archive into a table, an item... Regards,
Re: [O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
On 2015-05-17 Sun 01:13, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: Capture and Refile are two very different concepts. In the former, you define a static, or a set of static, accurate location that may not exist yet. In the latter, you pile up existing locations that you filter interactively, depending on the situation. I understand that. But in principle it would be possible to use the same or at least a very similar specification language for targets. But nevermind, it’s not exactly important. In your example above, it is possible to refile under any Finished headline by choosing the right path. You mean I can specify a path by typing it in when prompted by `org-refile'? Because the documentation of `org-refile-targets' doesn’t mention the possibility to specify paths as far as I can see. Archiving may indeed lack a way to specify a full path in a document. But supporting the full capture template elements doesn't make sense either. You cannot archive into a table, an item... Good point. Titus signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
Titus von der Malsburg malsb...@posteo.de writes: You mean I can specify a path by typing it in when prompted by `org-refile'? Because the documentation of `org-refile-targets' doesn’t mention the possibility to specify paths as far as I can see. See `org-refile-use-outline-path'. Regards,
Re: [O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
Hello, Titus von der Malsburg malsb...@posteo.de writes: Capturing, refiling, and archiving all create a new entry at a target location. Yet each of these facilities has it’s own way to specify the target. Capture templates have the most powerful target specification and refiling and archiving are both fairly limited. For users that is confusing and it prevents them from getting the most out of org-mode. Is there a technical reason for why different target specifications are used or is it just historical? Wouldn’t it make sense to use just one target specification “language” and to use that everywhere? Would you mind elaborating? What, exactly, are you suggesting? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
On 2015-05-13 Wed 03:40, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: Titus von der Malsburg malsb...@posteo.de writes: Capturing, refiling, and archiving all create a new entry at a target location. Yet each of these facilities has it’s own way to specify the target. Capture templates have the most powerful target specification and refiling and archiving are both fairly limited. For users that is confusing and it prevents them from getting the most out of org-mode. Is there a technical reason for why different target specifications are used or is it just historical? Wouldn’t it make sense to use just one target specification “language” and to use that everywhere? Would you mind elaborating? What, exactly, are you suggesting? The specification format used for capture templates seems to be the most expressive. I was wondering if it would make sense to use that also for refiling targets and for archiving targets. Specifically, I’d like to be able to say things like this: (setq org-refile-targets '(((file+olp my-agenda-file Agenda Finished) :prepend t) ((file+olp my-agenda-file Agenda Urgent) :prepend t))) and (setq org-archive-location '((file+olp my-agenda-file Agenda Finished) :prepend t)) The reason why I think this would be useful is that some simple things are currently not possible. Consider the following document structure: * Office ** To do ** Finished * Home ** To do ** Finished If I want to archive things under the “Agenda/Finished,” there is no way to achieve this (correct me if I’m wrong). I could try this (setq org-archive-location ::** Finished) but that is ambiguous. It doesn’t indicate which of the two “Finished” nodes should be the target. Similar problems exist for refile targets: if I want to have the first “Finished” in my targets but not the second, how would I achieve that? None of the available facilities allows me to do this (without changing the document structure). Using the capture template way of specifying targets, both problems would be easy to solve because that mechanism allows me to specify the complete path in the document tree leading to the node of interest (among other things, file+regexp, etc.) Titus signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[O] Capturing, refiling, archiving
Capturing, refiling, and archiving all create a new entry at a target location. Yet each of these facilities has it’s own way to specify the target. Capture templates have the most powerful target specification and refiling and archiving are both fairly limited. For users that is confusing and it prevents them from getting the most out of org-mode. Is there a technical reason for why different target specifications are used or is it just historical? Wouldn’t it make sense to use just one target specification “language” and to use that everywhere? Titus signature.asc Description: PGP signature
