Nuutti Kotivuori <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bastien wrote: >> The only thing that still tickles me here is that the *default* priority >> is not the *easiest* to assign. So why not this: > > I've never understood what's the difference between a line with the > default priority and a line without a priority at all.
Depends on what "default" stands for. It can be either: 1. the first available state when setting priorities 2. the default state you *want* to use when you need to set a priority; 3. the state that neither increase or decrease the priority rating > That is, with > the default settings: > > * [#B] Foo > * Bar > > Are these not equivalent in priority sorting? For sorting with org-sort, yes. But I use this convention that any item that has a priority - even the default priority - should be done before other items. For example: * [#A] Foo * [#B] Bar * [#C] Fooo * Baar In this case, * Baar and * [#B] are not equivalent. > If so, why should the default priority be ever explicitly said? To quickly be able to choose this default priority when cycling? :) -- Bastien _______________________________________________ Emacs-orgmode mailing list Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
