From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: Property for startup visibility? Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 14:03:08 +0200 Message-ID: <8BD9FF75-9C07-4010-9152-846E413AE729@science.uva.nl> References: <0C137CFD-3F28-4771-B61A-ACD447BA543C@alexanderonline.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ju4q9-0005De-T2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2008 08:03:14 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ju4q8-0005CT-H8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2008 08:03:12 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=38567 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ju4q8-0005CC-9r for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2008 08:03:12 -0400 Received: from korteweg.uva.nl ([146.50.98.70]:32835) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ju4q7-0004WR-2D for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 08 May 2008 08:03:11 -0400 In-Reply-To: <0C137CFD-3F28-4771-B61A-ACD447BA543C@alexanderonline.org> 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: bva@alexanderonline.org Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Richard KLINDA Hi Ben, On May 7, 2008, at 8:29 PM, bva@alexanderonline.org wrote: > Mostly I want the Short and Long Term projects visible and I'd like > to hide the calendars. I like to keep all this in one file because > I'm most familiar with simple emacs searching, and I'm not yet good > at org-mode/agenda searches (or global TODO lists, or tag matching, > or all that) I am starting to like the idea. > Since I don't work on "Solve World Hunger" everyday, I find it a > distraction (as so many people do) to look at the TODOs under that > project, so a simple TODO tree search hasn't helped me much. I know > there is more in org-mode that would fix this, but one of the big > pleasures of org-mode is how easy (easy, EASY!) it is to get started > on SOMETHING productive, without having to invest a huge shift in my > thinking. (I am working on that shift in thinking, but it has been > slow to take hold. Time to re-read the Allen book; maybe this time > I'll excise some more personal disorganizing demons) > > So I'd suggest that the 'VISIBILITY' property does get added. I'd > even suggest adding another stop on the org-mode-tab-cycle chain > (FOLDED VISIBILITY-PROPERTY CHILDREN SUBTREE). Definitely not. Visibility cycling works because there is a clear sequence in it from showing little to showing everything. Such an extra stop would kill intuition, I believe. Instead, I could make a command, say `C-u C-u TAB' to switch back the entire buffer to the startup visibility. And by the way, during C-c C-c on an option, org- mode-hook is not run again. > I can even see feature-creep with this, as someone may want org-mode > to update the VISIBILITY property automatically on killing/saving > the buffer, so when the file is revisited, any hand-tuned folding is > recreated. That has been requested before, but storing the visibility permanently in properties sound like overkill to me. So no for now. > Thought-experiment: Should the VISIBILITY property be automatically > inherited? I dont think so. Better to make possible values for the visibility that affect the entire tree below. For example: folded children (like the local "children" state) content (like the global "content" state, but local tree only all - Carsten