Gustav Wikström writes:
> Hi! > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Emacs-orgmode <emacs-orgmode-bounces+gustav=whil...@gnu.org> On Behalf >> Of Roland Everaert >> Sent: den 16 december 2019 12:26 >> To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >> Subject: Re: [Idea] Org Collections >> >> +1 for this idea. >> >> You speak about one document used by multiple collections, how do you >> plan to manage that from a file system point of view? > > The idea was to let the user define the scope of each collection herself. > Similar to how an agenda is defined today (Maybe in the same way even?). Most > simple configuration would be to let a collection be one folder. But in the > end it would be up to the imagination of and usefulness for the user. Having > one document in multiple collections wouldn't be any issue because the > collections are only pointing to locations of files in the filesystem. And if > creating overlap between collections sounds dumb then it's a simple choice by > the user to not do it! Have you had a look at org-brain. I don't use is much, but there are some overlapping functionnality to merge, maybe. > >> How will be organized a collection, still from the FS point of view? > > Maybe the comments above answer that as well? > >> As some are delving into the abyss of sementic, I propose aspects >> instead of collections or contexts. Ultimately we are trying to manage >> various aspects of our life, by splitting those aspects into files or >> diretories and what not. So, if it is the intent of your idea, the term >> aspect seems more appropriate than collection or context IMHO. > > Many words could work. Context, Project, Group, Aspect, Areas, etc. I first > thought of the name "project" to match the Projectile package. But I think > collection is a better concept here. It lets the user think not of how it > should be used but rather of what it consists. Which is a collection of files > (and settings). That collection can ofc. be used for project, as aspects, or > be seen as contexts or areas. So in my mind collection is the broader, more > applicable term. It has less subjective meaning attached to how this > functionality could be used. It IS a collection but can be USED as aspects, > for projects, etc. What do you say? đ I think I can live with it ;) > >> >> Did you think about the specific UI of aspects management? >> Proposal of UI I particularly like: >> - Mu4E >> - forge/magit > > Not really.. Except I agree with you on magit. The other I haven't used. Mu4E is a major mode for managing e-mails using the mu index. it provides a main view with bookmarks and entries to perform searches and composing message, among othe thing, but what I find more useful are the header view, which displays a multi-columns list of e-mails with associated meta-data and a message view allowing to view the content of an e-mail. The header view allows for bulk actions while the message view act, obiously, on the current message and permit replying and transfering the current e-mail. > >> >> How to keep track of all those aspects? > > My first thought was to define them in a simple list. > >> >> I will surely have more to say, but, as of know I am at work. >> >> Regards, >> >> Roland. > > Thanks for your comments! > > Regards > Gustav -- Luke, use the FOSS Sent from Emacs
