Re: example paper written in org completely

[Samuel Banya]

Hey Tim,

Some things to consider:
- Org Roam
- Org Brain
- Even the philosophy of taking ideas from "Getting Things Done" to get a good 
system of tasks

Also, I would label your headers for todo list items as "tasks" rather then 
"todo list items". Why? 

Because its a different mindset altogether and way more inviting.

I do this for my work and personal org todo lists.

I am in the camp where you have a giant org docs, since I think having multiple 
files for the same overall structured goal is a bit silly and unnecessary.

I recommend having a giant todo list org doc for your work stuff. And then have 
a separate one called 'life.org' where you keep all your personal notes. This 
is so that in the future you can quickly search through your notes for anything 
you might have done but you forgot about. This helps me a ton as I record a lot 
of ideas that sometimes turn into cool projects either now, or later.

Plus, organize your headers accordingly.

Ex:
* Things To Do
** Week Of (Current Week)
* COMPLETED_TASKS: 2021
** Week Of (Week That Has Already Taken Place)

If you learn how to shuffle entire headings around your Org document 
accordingly, you can get a good workflow going.

This means that you will have to learn how to use 'org-refile', as it will help 
you move tasks around and refile them in the "Getting Things Done" easily.

You can even make org capture templates to quickly insert your ideas (Lord 
knows how many times I almost went to sleep and had amazing ideas that I'm 
super thankful that I wrote down).

I also recommend using the Helm package, as its auto-completion and other 
features help SO much when it comes to org-mode tasks, and blows the other 
packages out of the water.

Hope this helps :)

~ Sam

On Sat, Jun 19, 2021, at 9:58 AM, Jeremie Juste wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> The thread is going far from the original post, and I'm pushing it
> further. Eric, sorry for that.
> 
> But this is an interesting topic so just to have some more thoughts on this 
> I'm jumping
> in. Org-mode has enhanced my organizational skills and I have still a
> lot to learn here. To continue this conversation, we need a philosopher
> here one I'm far from being one, so please take my comments lightly.
> 
> On Saturday, 19 Jun 2021 at 09:26, Tim Cross wrote:
> > A major pitfall with todo lists and priorities is that we fail to make
> > the distinction between important and urgent tasks. What ends up
> > happening is that all our time gets consumed by urgent tasks and we
> > never get time to address important tasks. Unfortunately, it is the
> > important tasks which, once completed, will reduce the number or time
> > taken to deal with urgent tasks - we end up being more reactive and
> > proactive.
> 
> First how do we make the distinction between urgent and important tasks?
> Many tasks are important because they are urgent but who and what
> defines their urgency?
> 
> >
> > In our case, we all hated having to update/edit the course guides in MS
> > Office because it was painful and time consuming, but urgent. However,
> > nobody belt they had the time to fix matters, despite us all agreeing it
> > was important.
> 
> This reminds me of the Aesop fable the [1] Mice in Council, which pushes the
> importance part to the extreme.
> 
> [1]: https://aesopsfables.org/F184_The-Mice-in-Council.html.
> 
> A way to solve this might be identify some heroes and compensate them for
> doing their job. Too many heroes never have their inner calling. 
> 
> >
> > What would have been really great is if we had more Emacs users. We
> You are in good company here.
> 
> > could then just have used org mode for the base format and even less
> > work would have been required to convert from MS Office, but that will
> > never happen. On the up side, I do see more and more ideas originally
> > germinated in an Emacs environment finding there way into other tool
> > chains, so perhaps the environments of the future won't suck quite as
> > much as they might if MS Office had been the only source for
> > inspiration! As the Beta v VHS war demonstrated, great technology is not
> > enough, you also need to factor in marketing and advertising budgets of
> > the competition!
> 
> [2] Monday.com raised $574 Million, in an IPO this month.  Many times
> I'm forced to use pictures as replacement for
> table and I am still struggling to add more DONE states there.
> 
> [2]: 
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-10/monday-com-prices-u-s-ipo-above-range-at-155-a-share
> 
> I suspect that it would be difficult to compete with a front-end with
> org-mode at the back, but again, I'm telling more than I know.
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Jeremie Juste
> 
> 

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Saturday, 19 Jun 2021 at 11:58, Jeremie Juste wrote:
> The thread is going far from the original post, and I'm pushing it
> further. Eric, sorry for that.
>
> But this is an interesting topic so just to have some more thoughts on
> this I'm jumping in.

It is indeed an interesting topic so no worries!  Serendipity...  I'm
enjoying seeing where it's going.  Org mode is more than just a toy:
it's an enabling technology for a very wide range of activities and
that's what makes it incredibly powerful.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-566-gf0198e
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Jeremie Juste]

Hello,

The thread is going far from the original post, and I'm pushing it
further. Eric, sorry for that.

But this is an interesting topic so just to have some more thoughts on this I'm 
jumping
in. Org-mode has enhanced my organizational skills and I have still a
lot to learn here. To continue this conversation, we need a philosopher
here one I'm far from being one, so please take my comments lightly.

On Saturday, 19 Jun 2021 at 09:26, Tim Cross wrote:
> A major pitfall with todo lists and priorities is that we fail to make
> the distinction between important and urgent tasks. What ends up
> happening is that all our time gets consumed by urgent tasks and we
> never get time to address important tasks. Unfortunately, it is the
> important tasks which, once completed, will reduce the number or time
> taken to deal with urgent tasks - we end up being more reactive and
> proactive.

First how do we make the distinction between urgent and important tasks?
Many tasks are important because they are urgent but who and what
defines their urgency?

>
> In our case, we all hated having to update/edit the course guides in MS
> Office because it was painful and time consuming, but urgent. However,
> nobody belt they had the time to fix matters, despite us all agreeing it
> was important.

This reminds me of the Aesop fable the [1] Mice in Council, which pushes the
importance part to the extreme.

[1]: https://aesopsfables.org/F184_The-Mice-in-Council.html.

A way to solve this might be identify some heroes and compensate them for
doing their job. Too many heroes never have their inner calling. 

>
> What would have been really great is if we had more Emacs users. We
You are in good company here.

> could then just have used org mode for the base format and even less
> work would have been required to convert from MS Office, but that will
> never happen. On the up side, I do see more and more ideas originally
> germinated in an Emacs environment finding there way into other tool
> chains, so perhaps the environments of the future won't suck quite as
> much as they might if MS Office had been the only source for
> inspiration! As the Beta v VHS war demonstrated, great technology is not
> enough, you also need to factor in marketing and advertising budgets of
> the competition!

[2] Monday.com raised $574 Million, in an IPO this month.  Many times
I'm forced to use pictures as replacement for
table and I am still struggling to add more DONE states there.

[2]: 
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-10/monday-com-prices-u-s-ipo-above-range-at-155-a-share

I suspect that it would be difficult to compete with a front-end with
org-mode at the back, but again, I'm telling more than I know.

Best regards,
-- 
Jeremie Juste

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Tim Cross]

Uwe Brauer  writes:

> Footnotes:
> [1]  I am forced to modify each year our course guides. These guides are
>  written (no joke) in MS Office format pre-97. It has complex but badly
>  formatted tables that makes it impossible to edit with anything
>  than MS Office (or the markup is distorted).
>

We had exactly the same problem. This is a good example of the important
v urgent problem we are often faced with and is a critical part of how I
manage my todo lists.

A major pitfall with todo lists and priorities is that we fail to make
the distinction between important and urgent tasks. What ends up
happening is that all our time gets consumed by urgent tasks and we
never get time to address important tasks. Unfortunately, it is the
important tasks which, once completed, will reduce the number or time
taken to deal with urgent tasks - we end up being more reactive and
proactive.

In our case, we all hated having to update/edit the course guides in MS
Office because it was painful and time consuming, but urgent. However,
nobody belt they had the time to fix matters, despite us all agreeing it
was important.

One year, we decided to just let some urgent tasks slip, accept the flak
this caused and instead spend the time fixing the formatting of the
course guides.

We actually ended up developing a new format, inspired by org and some
markdown formats and which used pandoc to generate the final output. We
were forgiven for failing to meet some urgent deadlines because in the
end, we had far better quality course guides which were easier to
maintain and available in more formats with greater consistency.

Unfortunately, the resources freed by not having to spend so long
updating the course guides each year was soon absorbed by other urgent
tasks, so ultimately, no real change in workload. However, students were
happier as course guides were better and we were then able to move on to
other important v urgent battles.

What would have been really great is if we had more Emacs users. We
could then just have used org mode for the base format and even less
work would have been required to convert from MS Office, but that will
never happen. On the up side, I do see more and more ideas originally
germinated in an Emacs environment finding there way into other tool
chains, so perhaps the environments of the future won't suck quite as
much as they might if MS Office had been the only source for
inspiration! As the Beta v VHS war demonstrated, great technology is not
enough, you also need to factor in marketing and advertising budgets of
the competition!


-- 
Tim Cross

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Tim Cross]

Christopher Dimech  writes:

> It is a good package, but since it is inactive, org-mode could assimilate
> it so people can use it, rather than in the form of an external package.

I don't see any advantage in doing this. It is simple to include the
package. Furthermore, if we start to bundle it, we also take on more
responsibility for ensuring it works etc. Besides, where do we then
'draw the line' - there are lots of additional and useful Latex
packages, many of which are probably even more commonly used, such as
some of the packages which extend/enhance tables, code listings, etc. 

>
> Defining the structure of an algorithm in a document is of value.
> Can one do something similar using current code or does the algorithmicx
> package have some more pleasant capabilities?
>

The algorithmicx package does add some useful functionality wrt
formatting algorithms, but only for Latex exports. Just
bundling the latex package with org will not change the existing
situation - it will still only be functionality available with latex
exports. All it *might* do is remove the requirement to install the
latex package and add it to your export headers. 

Having similar functionality which is back end agnostic and based on
just org syntax would be useful for some users. However, this would
involve re-implementation of what the latex package does in elisp and
adding code to the export layer to interpret the new structures
appropriately. The big question is whether anyone has sufficient
interest and desire for this functionality to actually do the work.

My gut feeling is that the number of people who need this functionality
who are not satisfied witih the current situation is too small to reach
the level of critical mass that would see this requirement realised. 

>
>> Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 at 8:04 PM
>> From: "Eric S Fraga" 
>> To: "Christopher Dimech" 
>> Cc: "Emacs Org mode mailing list" 
>> Subject: Re: example paper written in org completely
>>
>> On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 19:19, Christopher Dimech wrote:
>> > The algorithmicx latex package has a very annoying licence, the LaTeX
>> > Project Public License.  Although a free software license, it
>> > incompatible with the GPL with many requirements.
>>
>> And?  I'm not sure of the relevance.  I use many LaTeX packages when
>> writing.  Whether they are GPL or not is rather secondary, in my view.
>>
>> --
>> : Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
>> : Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096
>>


-- 
Tim Cross

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Friday, 18 Jun 2021 at 13:55, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> Right, fair enough. I thought it was MS Office or something like this.[1]

Yeah; I avoid that problem mostly by using ODT export in org.

Sometimes, if I have to work on an actual document that LibreOffice or
gnumeric cannot handle, I access our institution's systems using
rdesktop and/or a web interface.  Luckily, I only have to the latter
once every few months at most.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-557-gceb78e
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Uwe Brauer]

>>> "ESF" == Eric S Fraga  writes:

> On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 21:54, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> I wonder what that software might be ;-)

> Actually, in this case, it isn't one of the usual suspects.  I use Linux
> for everything so I have pretty much found open source solutions to all
> my usual requirements.  This particular case is a modelling system from
> a small company.

> I won't name and shame because they actually have, in comparison, very
> reasonable licensing terms and conditions, including free versions for
> students.

Right, fair enough. I thought it was MS Office or something like this.[1]

Footnotes:
[1]  I am forced to modify each year our course guides. These guides are
 written (no joke) in MS Office format pre-97. It has complex but badly
 formatted tables that makes it impossible to edit with anything
 than MS Office (or the markup is distorted).



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 19:19, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> The algorithmicx latex package has a very annoying licence, the LaTeX
> Project Public License.  Although a free software license, it
> incompatible with the GPL with many requirements.

And?  I'm not sure of the relevance.  I use many LaTeX packages when
writing.  Whether they are GPL or not is rather secondary, in my view.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 21:54, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> I wonder what that software might be ;-)

Actually, in this case, it isn't one of the usual suspects.  I use Linux
for everything so I have pretty much found open source solutions to all
my usual requirements.  This particular case is a modelling system from
a small company.

I won't name and shame because they actually have, in comparison, very
reasonable licensing terms and conditions, including free versions for
students.

But, if there were an option that was open source etc., I would jump on
it.
-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Uwe Brauer]

>>> "ESF" == Eric S Fraga  writes:

> On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 18:33, Uwe Brauer wrote:
>> [1]  truth being told, a lot of mathematicians and I think physicists
>> don't upgrade very frequently so it might have been a
>> compatibility issue.  

> Funnily enough, just in the past hour or so, I ended up in panic
> mode.  I rely on one commercial software (not by choice).  I knew I had
> an up to date licence but the software insisted that I did not have a
> licence.  Turns out that the actual software itself was umpteen years
> old and I needed a newer version of the software (which I could
> download) to use with the updated licence (and of course the old licence
> had expired).

> Downloaded new version and everything is working.


I wonder what that software might be ;-)


> However, I work on a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach.  And
> that's why I don't like commercial closed software reason #381.

> Time for a beer. ;-)

Cheers 


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 18:31, Christopher Dimech wrote:
> Hi Eric, could you provihe examples on how to write equations in org.
> Does org accept both tex and latex commands?

If you look at the org file I mentioned (link in signature), you'll see
several examples of LaTeX equations in org.

I don't use TeX directly, only LaTeX.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 18:33, Uwe Brauer wrote:
> [1]  truth being told, a lot of mathematicians and I think physicists
>  don't upgrade very frequently so it might have been a
>  compatibility issue.  

Funnily enough, just in the past hour or so, I ended up in panic
mode.  I rely on one commercial software (not by choice).  I knew I had
an up to date licence but the software insisted that I did not have a
licence.  Turns out that the actual software itself was umpteen years
old and I needed a newer version of the software (which I could
download) to use with the updated licence (and of course the old licence
had expired).

Downloaded new version and everything is working.

However, I work on a "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach.  And
that's why I don't like commercial closed software reason #381.

Time for a beer. ;-)

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Uwe Brauer]

>>> "GM" == Greg Minshall  writes:

> Eric,
> thanks very much for sharing.  it's nice that you also provide the .org
> file on arXiv -- good marketing material!  :) ah, and mention in the
> code appendix.  it's very useful to have the .org file as a model of how
> to do various things.

> i don't know if this is you, or is arXiv, but the ancillary files
> ("details" on the main page) claims to get .tar.gz (and, indeed,
> downloads as a .tar.gz file) but is, in fact, an uncompressed .tar file.

That is a arXiv thing. Let's put it this way: they don't rely on very
modern software (it took them ages to get a recent texlive version)[1]

Uwe Brauer 


Footnotes:
[1]  truth being told, a lot of mathematicians and I think physicists
 don't upgrade very frequently so it might have been a
 compatibility issue.  



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:38, Greg Minshall wrote:
> it's nice that you also provide the .org file on arXiv -- good
> marketing material!  :) ah, and mention in the code appendix.  

Thank you.  Credit where credit is due!  

I wanted to reference both org and Emacs in some way, not to mention
Eric Schulte et al.'s paper on using org for literate
programming.  These have all changed, dramatically for the better, how I
undertake my research.  So much has been made about org's time
management aspects in the wider community, which I do use extensively,
but less about the support in org but also Emacs for actual writing and
it is this support that is the killer feature for me.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Eric S Fraga]

On Thursday, 17 Jun 2021 at 16:38, Greg Minshall wrote:
> i don't know if this is you, or is arXiv, but the ancillary files
> ("details" on the main page) claims to get .tar.gz (and, indeed,
> downloads as a .tar.gz file) but is, in fact, an uncompressed .tar file.

Not me.  I uploaded the files following whatever instructions they gave
me.  I believe that I had the option of uploading either .tar or .tar.gz
and chose the former (as the files are not large).  Maybe the web site
is not quite consistent with what they ask of authors.

-- 
: Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
: Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Samuel Banya]

Wow, that example with 3D modeling, aka "Laurana_tex.zip 
" is absolutely insane.

That's amazing!

I mention this because I like doing art on the side, and am getting into 
Blender just to produce reference images for sketching, etc. and find that 
fascinating that you could literally embed 3D models into a TeX document:
http://tug.org/texshowcase/

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021, at 8:06 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> for those that may be interested, my latest paper (well, preprint at
> this stage) is available if you are looking for an example of a
> numerical work where the paper is completely written in org, including
> data analysis and visualisation.  See signature for link.
> 
> The arxiv deposit includes the complete org file as an ancillary file.
> -- 
> : Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50, Org release_9.4.6-551-gf70e36
> : Latest paper written in org: https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.05096
> 
> 

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Greg Minshall]

Eric,

thanks very much for sharing.  it's nice that you also provide the .org
file on arXiv -- good marketing material!  :) ah, and mention in the
code appendix.  it's very useful to have the .org file as a model of how
to do various things.

i don't know if this is you, or is arXiv, but the ancillary files
("details" on the main page) claims to get .tar.gz (and, indeed,
downloads as a .tar.gz file) but is, in fact, an uncompressed .tar file.

cheers, Greg

Re: example paper written in org completely

[Juan Manuel Macías]

Hi Eric,

Eric S Fraga writes:

> Dear all,
>
> for those that may be interested, my latest paper (well, preprint at
> this stage) is available if you are looking for an example of a
> numerical work where the paper is completely written in org, including
> data analysis and visualisation.  See signature for link.
>
> The arxiv deposit includes the complete org file as an ancillary file.

Congratulations. Thanks for sharing your work.

By the way, I think it would be nice to create on the Worg website a
section called "Org Showcase" or similar, just like there is a "Tex
Showcase" on the Tex User Group website: http://tug.org/texshowcase/,
with samples of published books, articles or web pages, all written in
Org, to demonstrate the productivity of Org Mode.

What do you think?

Best regards,

Juan Manuel