Discussion Forum > Potential Contributions from Org-Mode
I looked at org-mode once. I was overwhelmed. In this case, I have to say less is more. I challenge you: Demonstrate a simple useful way to use it, which doesn't require two weeks study to get going. I don't think it can be done..
October 5, 2011 at 2:47 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Well, that does it! I will have to see what all the fuss is about Emacs (former vi user here ;).
October 5, 2011 at 3:11 |
Bernie
Bernie
Alan wrote:
<<Demonstrate a simple useful way to use it, which doesn't require two weeks study to get going. I don't think it can be done..>>
Probably not! Emacs and vi grew up as competitors on UNIX terminals, in the pre-mouse land of cryptic key combinations, designed by and for computer programmers. Want to insert a new line of text? In vi, it's easy: just type a capital "O." Want to copy the next eight words after the cursor? Just type "8yw." Er, you did notice at a glance that your desired string was composed of exactly eight words, right? Counting them with your finger will get your pocket protector revoked.
I quickly embraced vi back then and grew to really really rock at it. In fact, recently I fired it up on my Mac, and I have to say, I got things done faster than with any point-and-click editor. In my brief stint with Emacs, it seemed to be the same general idea, except you had to hold down the ctrl key to do almost anything, which seemed to me like a bother (really, a ctrl-O takes two hands ... TWO HANDS! Unless you put your left thumb on the right ctrl key, but who does *that*?). Though Emacs users were generally a very satisfied (and evangelizing!) bunch, and were nearly all former vi users, I just never wanted to invest in another text-editor learning curve.
Thus I'd imagine Emacs/org-mode is best for people who feel at home editing .bashrc or .INI files. Then again, I haven't seen an Emacs window since 1996! Surely it is all prettily mouse-ified now, so perhaps the pocket protector is no longer required.
What do you think, James?
<<Demonstrate a simple useful way to use it, which doesn't require two weeks study to get going. I don't think it can be done..>>
Probably not! Emacs and vi grew up as competitors on UNIX terminals, in the pre-mouse land of cryptic key combinations, designed by and for computer programmers. Want to insert a new line of text? In vi, it's easy: just type a capital "O." Want to copy the next eight words after the cursor? Just type "8yw." Er, you did notice at a glance that your desired string was composed of exactly eight words, right? Counting them with your finger will get your pocket protector revoked.
I quickly embraced vi back then and grew to really really rock at it. In fact, recently I fired it up on my Mac, and I have to say, I got things done faster than with any point-and-click editor. In my brief stint with Emacs, it seemed to be the same general idea, except you had to hold down the ctrl key to do almost anything, which seemed to me like a bother (really, a ctrl-O takes two hands ... TWO HANDS! Unless you put your left thumb on the right ctrl key, but who does *that*?). Though Emacs users were generally a very satisfied (and evangelizing!) bunch, and were nearly all former vi users, I just never wanted to invest in another text-editor learning curve.
Thus I'd imagine Emacs/org-mode is best for people who feel at home editing .bashrc or .INI files. Then again, I haven't seen an Emacs window since 1996! Surely it is all prettily mouse-ified now, so perhaps the pocket protector is no longer required.
What do you think, James?
October 5, 2011 at 3:37 |
Bernie
Bernie
First, I would like to submit just a few draft changes to the original post. Just cleared up some language. I'll delete the bulk, and show you just the additions. Wrote it last night, and came back to it after the draft period expired:
COPY
There's a lot of mystery behind it, but suffice it to say, if you downloaded EMACS or any permutation of it today, Org-Mode will be preinstalled with your copy. It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, indeed everything is configurable about it and needs to be declared...more commonly associated with coders, who are already spending their time working in a coding environment.
* You can create email links to/from your tasks. In fact it supports just about any link or export file type you can think of, from publishing a paper, code snippets, exporting to a calendar or webpage, linking internally to other lines or to other sites. (Nothing comes without being properly set-up.)
*Org can deal with a type of task with an open-state keyword, which is commonly referred to as a habit.
*Built from an outline, Org-mode also acknowledges that sometimes its better just to copy the task rather than set up repeats. You may do so by copying a task down the subtree and associating it with different dates.
*You can add effort estimates to a task. This is useful if you are contributing your talents to a central project manager, if you are accustomed to offering quotes and estimates, or if you want to get more accurate with your estimates through recorded examples.
*In fact, your tasks can live directly within your project planning materials, anywhere within the same directory as the others. You could put this directory in a cloud network. Batching will account for all or any of your .org files it finds and create a relevant list for you (whether it's a closed list or not would take some clever tricks.)
* Tasks can be timed, notes can be time stamped, and the software will intelligently know how to address work interruptions.
*There is a capture "mode" in emacs that makes the creation of tasks and notes more immediate.
In a more science fiction vein... Keywords could be used to save a page, mark a task as under review. I imagine if you worked on a team or lead one, the Org-Mode instructions could impose how the team should tag, what they should be working on, etc. Who's to say?
I for one, think I have functioning substitutes for just about all of the above list, but its a good checklist to see if you are missing any ingredients. And my tools are all integrated, just as they would be if they were in the same programming environment. Org-Mode is about as thorough as you can get. What you're not seeing are ways to record visual contributions, flowcharts, moquettes, any of it. You're also relegating your AF to a computer, which is not going to be so great when you work "in the field" "in transit" or with lots of other people.
The mobile options are not up to snuff yet. You need to "Push" up, "Push down" and configure remote file directories manually. Frankly, it's hard enough to know what to activate in the buffer's .emacs file on your mainframe, or even what that means if you're coming in cold (creating a template text file that serves as your preferences and start-up settings, when you work in this Mode of EMACS.)
What else are you NOT seeing? Well if you are like me and see logic as ultimately disappointing (see Tim Hartford's talk on TED) the extent of the customization here might make it hard for anyone else but yourself to buy into the same system. It's not beautiful, and doesn't use the interface guidelines that most end-users these days would take for granted. All that is up to you, and short of it, I doubt we would have a common currency for collaborating and talking autofocus. It's like Wordpress. Sure it's open-source, but that doesn't mean everyone qualifies to build you a website. Professionals in awareness management and systems analysis: here is a real technical niche for you. I imagine Org-Mode could be a good environment to build enterprise and personal solutions for clients.
The learning curve is not just steep, it could easily be a year long (if you're not already kicking butt in EMACS, you'd need to read up on that too, and you were interested in hacks.) Furthermore, outlines haven't meant much to me since I finished secondary school and was required to jot them down from my history teacher's lecture. But if you are like me and opened the pandora's box, at least you now know what Org-Mode would have in store for you.
END COPY
COPY
There's a lot of mystery behind it, but suffice it to say, if you downloaded EMACS or any permutation of it today, Org-Mode will be preinstalled with your copy. It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, indeed everything is configurable about it and needs to be declared...more commonly associated with coders, who are already spending their time working in a coding environment.
* You can create email links to/from your tasks. In fact it supports just about any link or export file type you can think of, from publishing a paper, code snippets, exporting to a calendar or webpage, linking internally to other lines or to other sites. (Nothing comes without being properly set-up.)
*Org can deal with a type of task with an open-state keyword, which is commonly referred to as a habit.
*Built from an outline, Org-mode also acknowledges that sometimes its better just to copy the task rather than set up repeats. You may do so by copying a task down the subtree and associating it with different dates.
*You can add effort estimates to a task. This is useful if you are contributing your talents to a central project manager, if you are accustomed to offering quotes and estimates, or if you want to get more accurate with your estimates through recorded examples.
*In fact, your tasks can live directly within your project planning materials, anywhere within the same directory as the others. You could put this directory in a cloud network. Batching will account for all or any of your .org files it finds and create a relevant list for you (whether it's a closed list or not would take some clever tricks.)
* Tasks can be timed, notes can be time stamped, and the software will intelligently know how to address work interruptions.
*There is a capture "mode" in emacs that makes the creation of tasks and notes more immediate.
In a more science fiction vein... Keywords could be used to save a page, mark a task as under review. I imagine if you worked on a team or lead one, the Org-Mode instructions could impose how the team should tag, what they should be working on, etc. Who's to say?
I for one, think I have functioning substitutes for just about all of the above list, but its a good checklist to see if you are missing any ingredients. And my tools are all integrated, just as they would be if they were in the same programming environment. Org-Mode is about as thorough as you can get. What you're not seeing are ways to record visual contributions, flowcharts, moquettes, any of it. You're also relegating your AF to a computer, which is not going to be so great when you work "in the field" "in transit" or with lots of other people.
The mobile options are not up to snuff yet. You need to "Push" up, "Push down" and configure remote file directories manually. Frankly, it's hard enough to know what to activate in the buffer's .emacs file on your mainframe, or even what that means if you're coming in cold (creating a template text file that serves as your preferences and start-up settings, when you work in this Mode of EMACS.)
What else are you NOT seeing? Well if you are like me and see logic as ultimately disappointing (see Tim Hartford's talk on TED) the extent of the customization here might make it hard for anyone else but yourself to buy into the same system. It's not beautiful, and doesn't use the interface guidelines that most end-users these days would take for granted. All that is up to you, and short of it, I doubt we would have a common currency for collaborating and talking autofocus. It's like Wordpress. Sure it's open-source, but that doesn't mean everyone qualifies to build you a website. Professionals in awareness management and systems analysis: here is a real technical niche for you. I imagine Org-Mode could be a good environment to build enterprise and personal solutions for clients.
The learning curve is not just steep, it could easily be a year long (if you're not already kicking butt in EMACS, you'd need to read up on that too, and you were interested in hacks.) Furthermore, outlines haven't meant much to me since I finished secondary school and was required to jot them down from my history teacher's lecture. But if you are like me and opened the pandora's box, at least you now know what Org-Mode would have in store for you.
END COPY
October 5, 2011 at 13:02 |
James Levine
James Levine
Alan, I can not meet your challenge. Bernie's got the right stuff because he's probably the first person to respond, whether here or on EMACS forum, who is comfortable in that environment while not vehemently defending his turf and can also put the situation into layman's terms. Anyone can say, "Of course, it's easy!" and then show you something convoluted that is clearly only easy for themselves.
Bernie, I hear you; the shortcuts are...ridiculous? When the power users describe how fast they are, do any of them account for the time it would take to look up 3000+- keyboard combinations, function and variable names before committing them to memory? (I'm sure there's some internal logic that makes this easier.) What I gave you here were all the specifications that could (but not necessarily) get the job done in a task management system. Org-Mode does a good job of taking the Emacs outline mode and making it friendlier. Still, my evaluation did not go into what extent the point-click vs shortcuts spectrum effects one's productivity.
Bernie, I hear you; the shortcuts are...ridiculous? When the power users describe how fast they are, do any of them account for the time it would take to look up 3000+- keyboard combinations, function and variable names before committing them to memory? (I'm sure there's some internal logic that makes this easier.) What I gave you here were all the specifications that could (but not necessarily) get the job done in a task management system. Org-Mode does a good job of taking the Emacs outline mode and making it friendlier. Still, my evaluation did not go into what extent the point-click vs shortcuts spectrum effects one's productivity.
October 5, 2011 at 13:18 |
James Levine
James Levine
James, perhaps the take-home message for those not already familiar with Emacs is to explore outlining mode in their favorite word processor.
Most modern word processors have an outline mode which allows headings to be collapsed, thus getting details out of the way. This lets us build a digital AF notebook in which each "line" (heading) can be annotated as much as desired without blocking the notebook's flow or cluttering it visually. I know org-mode does a lot more than that, but it's a start. One could simply type "***" as a heading to mark the virtual page boundaries, then delete lines that have been actioned. Or, one could use the strike-through text style and leave them in place.
Alan, your OneNote setup already handles all of this, but those who do not want to learn OneNote or get into a new program may feel much better about their favorite word processor's built-in outlining mode. Outlining is a ubiquitous but very under-used feature.
So, why annotate your digital AF notebook?
- keep all your notes in one place
- search your notes
- easily copy any of it to move elsewhere (e.g., at dismissal)
- make links within your document if you reference that project/task from another page (links are another ubiquitous but underused feature)
- use links to other digital resources too, outside of the notebook file: web sites or other files on your computer
- that darn single line of text is *never* enough! (though I'm getting better at it)
James, I've toyed with using a Makefile to pull together project info & tasks from various text files. The result would be a bit like org-mode's agenda display and its various other compiled readouts. Creating a project could be as simple as opening a new text file containing a few simple tags (such as "TODO") separating notes from tasks, waiting-fors, etc. The Makefile would automatically pick up changes and new files, rebuilding the whole picture. Of course, it would need a helper script (grep or awk?) for parsing out these tags and items.
I guess that's the ultimate digital dashboard, in the vein of "what's true right now?" And all I'd have to do nightly is type "make dashboard."
Most modern word processors have an outline mode which allows headings to be collapsed, thus getting details out of the way. This lets us build a digital AF notebook in which each "line" (heading) can be annotated as much as desired without blocking the notebook's flow or cluttering it visually. I know org-mode does a lot more than that, but it's a start. One could simply type "***" as a heading to mark the virtual page boundaries, then delete lines that have been actioned. Or, one could use the strike-through text style and leave them in place.
Alan, your OneNote setup already handles all of this, but those who do not want to learn OneNote or get into a new program may feel much better about their favorite word processor's built-in outlining mode. Outlining is a ubiquitous but very under-used feature.
So, why annotate your digital AF notebook?
- keep all your notes in one place
- search your notes
- easily copy any of it to move elsewhere (e.g., at dismissal)
- make links within your document if you reference that project/task from another page (links are another ubiquitous but underused feature)
- use links to other digital resources too, outside of the notebook file: web sites or other files on your computer
- that darn single line of text is *never* enough! (though I'm getting better at it)
James, I've toyed with using a Makefile to pull together project info & tasks from various text files. The result would be a bit like org-mode's agenda display and its various other compiled readouts. Creating a project could be as simple as opening a new text file containing a few simple tags (such as "TODO") separating notes from tasks, waiting-fors, etc. The Makefile would automatically pick up changes and new files, rebuilding the whole picture. Of course, it would need a helper script (grep or awk?) for parsing out these tags and items.
I guess that's the ultimate digital dashboard, in the vein of "what's true right now?" And all I'd have to do nightly is type "make dashboard."
October 5, 2011 at 16:52 |
Bernie
Bernie
<<Most modern word processors have an outline mode>>
Bernie:
Thanks for stating what must be very obvious to you. I'm testing the outline mode in MS Word 2010 and it is indeed very robust. You can link, attach documents expand and collapse all very easily.
Bernie:
Thanks for stating what must be very obvious to you. I'm testing the outline mode in MS Word 2010 and it is indeed very robust. You can link, attach documents expand and collapse all very easily.
October 5, 2011 at 17:38 |
JD
JD
Great, JD! I hope that meets your needs and simplifies your digital life.
I've been relieved to move away from proprietary fies (personal info managers, etc.) into plain text files and word processing documents. I was always attracted to the tagging and searching and categorizing (and scripting!) in those proprietary systems, but regular files can be searched and organized more easily and just as effectively, and I never used the scripting. Plus, you don't have to worry about the proprietary file getting corrupted or the software discontinued, how to export your data, whether it will accept a certain type of attachment, etc.
I've been relieved to move away from proprietary fies (personal info managers, etc.) into plain text files and word processing documents. I was always attracted to the tagging and searching and categorizing (and scripting!) in those proprietary systems, but regular files can be searched and organized more easily and just as effectively, and I never used the scripting. Plus, you don't have to worry about the proprietary file getting corrupted or the software discontinued, how to export your data, whether it will accept a certain type of attachment, etc.
October 7, 2011 at 8:17 |
Bernie
Bernie
+1 for outline mode.
I know that I mentioned earlier that don't naturally think and brainstorm in the construct of an outline, but I do use them to summarize a book that already has clear subheadings and bullet points, etc (My colleagues swear by my outlines.). Navigating and shifting the hierarchy is great in iWorks pages as it is I'm sure in MS Office.
Perhaps where taskpaper and org-mode will head will be clear scripts that allow you to work in one environment for simplicity, and scale up or export when working with people in other platforms. It is all based on a text document, after-all. This should be as future-proof as it gets. There is already a script in Ruby that will import your Taskpaper outlines to org-mode, but its for you to copy the code and know what to do with it. There are no user-friendly conduits that you can install for your outliner or taskpaper that let you remain in a more comfortable and simple environment.
If you want to try an outline, I would encourage you to explore Evernote. A commonly overlooked feature which they recently added is the ability to link internally to your other notes. Combine this with an outline and you have the making of a wiki, or at least some of the blown-out functionality of org-mode. I know you can edit Evernote notes in org-mode, but why would you? The question I have is: could you put the power of org-mode behind the scenes in your chosen outliner?
I know that I mentioned earlier that don't naturally think and brainstorm in the construct of an outline, but I do use them to summarize a book that already has clear subheadings and bullet points, etc (My colleagues swear by my outlines.). Navigating and shifting the hierarchy is great in iWorks pages as it is I'm sure in MS Office.
Perhaps where taskpaper and org-mode will head will be clear scripts that allow you to work in one environment for simplicity, and scale up or export when working with people in other platforms. It is all based on a text document, after-all. This should be as future-proof as it gets. There is already a script in Ruby that will import your Taskpaper outlines to org-mode, but its for you to copy the code and know what to do with it. There are no user-friendly conduits that you can install for your outliner or taskpaper that let you remain in a more comfortable and simple environment.
If you want to try an outline, I would encourage you to explore Evernote. A commonly overlooked feature which they recently added is the ability to link internally to your other notes. Combine this with an outline and you have the making of a wiki, or at least some of the blown-out functionality of org-mode. I know you can edit Evernote notes in org-mode, but why would you? The question I have is: could you put the power of org-mode behind the scenes in your chosen outliner?
October 7, 2011 at 20:32 |
James Levine
James Levine
I used to love outlining. I used LifeBalance to organize my work into outlines and then beautifully it would spit out a list of suggested things to work on from that outline. Now I just write the list straight and skip the outline.
October 7, 2011 at 21:56 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Another variation to outlining, if one may call it that, is Mindmapping, and in this respect Freeplane reigns supreme in my opinion. Very fast when working on a complex map.
Central idea, with principles as branches, and sub-rules to principles - this is the form I use very often in my work.
It is something about radiating thoughts around the centre that keeps me constantly attached to mindmaps when conceptualising a complex area. It is of course, nothing more than an outline.
Central idea, with principles as branches, and sub-rules to principles - this is the form I use very often in my work.
It is something about radiating thoughts around the centre that keeps me constantly attached to mindmaps when conceptualising a complex area. It is of course, nothing more than an outline.
October 8, 2011 at 8:28 |
JD
JD
JD:
I've not heard of Freeplane. I'll have a look at it. Most commercial mind mappers I've come across have the facility to see and work in both outline and mindmap view and to change between the two at the touch of a button. I have to admit though that I have always found the outline view fits my way of thinking better than the mindmap view.
Afternote: I see that Freeplane is based on Freemind, which I have worked on quite a lot. I can't see any provision for outline view so it wouldn't suit me.
I've not heard of Freeplane. I'll have a look at it. Most commercial mind mappers I've come across have the facility to see and work in both outline and mindmap view and to change between the two at the touch of a button. I have to admit though that I have always found the outline view fits my way of thinking better than the mindmap view.
Afternote: I see that Freeplane is based on Freemind, which I have worked on quite a lot. I can't see any provision for outline view so it wouldn't suit me.
October 8, 2011 at 9:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<< I can't see any provision for outline view>>
Mark:
If you go to the view menu in Freeplane, you will see the "Outline view" command. It allows you to view your map in outline mode. If you prefer, you can then do Cntrl-A to highlight the whole outline, copy and then paste it to your word processor to view your work outlined quite neatly.
It's a clever workaround, in the absence of an inbuilt outliner like the other commercial offerings, but it does the job quite well.
Mark:
If you go to the view menu in Freeplane, you will see the "Outline view" command. It allows you to view your map in outline mode. If you prefer, you can then do Cntrl-A to highlight the whole outline, copy and then paste it to your word processor to view your work outlined quite neatly.
It's a clever workaround, in the absence of an inbuilt outliner like the other commercial offerings, but it does the job quite well.
October 8, 2011 at 10:09 |
JD
JD
JD:
Thanks for the clarification. I hadn't actually downloaded the program - I was going by the description on the website and the screen shots. I'll look more closely!
Thanks for the clarification. I hadn't actually downloaded the program - I was going by the description on the website and the screen shots. I'll look more closely!
October 8, 2011 at 10:45 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Thanks, JD & Mark, for the mentions of FreeMind & FreePlane.
I used to be hopelessly infatuated with a tool called Tinderbox which has similar aims, but ultimately it was too proprietary, too much at the whim of its one-man development team. He had a wonderful idea called "agents" that were like live, saved searches combing the map for nodes matching any pattern you wished—but you had to specify these patterns in a very weird and unmemorable query language of his arbitrary design. One day, an update changed a feature around which I'd built my main document (the file I "lived in"), and it no longer opened without crashing. He was very responsive at helping me ... at first ... until he chalked the whole thing up to some inexplicable hardware/memory error on my machine, despite the fact that I can duplicate the error on three different machines.
My main lesson was to use the simplest, standardized file formats as much as possible, even drawing simple maps using my word processor's drawing elements. But sometimes I really want to make a detailed map, and I miss TInderbox. So for those applications, I'll explore FreeMind & FreePlane.
Incidentally, if you want to draw a really beautiful map and especially if you want to post it on line, consider Inkscape at http://www.inkscape.org/ . It's for drawing and animating, not for managing information, but once you have a good layout in FreePlane, Inkscape could make it beautiful. For online sharing, Inkscape's output is .SVG, which opens natively in modern browsers and even supports dynamic/animation features similar to Flash.
I used to be hopelessly infatuated with a tool called Tinderbox which has similar aims, but ultimately it was too proprietary, too much at the whim of its one-man development team. He had a wonderful idea called "agents" that were like live, saved searches combing the map for nodes matching any pattern you wished—but you had to specify these patterns in a very weird and unmemorable query language of his arbitrary design. One day, an update changed a feature around which I'd built my main document (the file I "lived in"), and it no longer opened without crashing. He was very responsive at helping me ... at first ... until he chalked the whole thing up to some inexplicable hardware/memory error on my machine, despite the fact that I can duplicate the error on three different machines.
My main lesson was to use the simplest, standardized file formats as much as possible, even drawing simple maps using my word processor's drawing elements. But sometimes I really want to make a detailed map, and I miss TInderbox. So for those applications, I'll explore FreeMind & FreePlane.
Incidentally, if you want to draw a really beautiful map and especially if you want to post it on line, consider Inkscape at http://www.inkscape.org/ . It's for drawing and animating, not for managing information, but once you have a good layout in FreePlane, Inkscape could make it beautiful. For online sharing, Inkscape's output is .SVG, which opens natively in modern browsers and even supports dynamic/animation features similar to Flash.
October 8, 2011 at 19:35 |
Bernie
Bernie
Hi James. That MobileOrg for Android looks interesting http://orgmode.org/manual/MobileOrg.html#MobileOrg . Didn't yet manage to get it to sync with a simple index.org file in Dropbox. Will try again later.
Just Orgmode on my desktop didn't standout. Using both on desktop and mobile, might standout as good enough reasons for me to explore Emacs further. ;-)
Just Orgmode on my desktop didn't standout. Using both on desktop and mobile, might standout as good enough reasons for me to explore Emacs further. ;-)
October 9, 2011 at 5:20 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Bernie:
I've always wanted to use Tinderbox but I've never had a Mac and was not willing to buy one just for the sake of one program.
The developer kept promising he was about to produce a Windows version but he has never finished it - that was getting on for eight years ago!
http://www.markbernstein.org/Jan0401/TinderboxforWindows.html
I've always wanted to use Tinderbox but I've never had a Mac and was not willing to buy one just for the sake of one program.
The developer kept promising he was about to produce a Windows version but he has never finished it - that was getting on for eight years ago!
http://www.markbernstein.org/Jan0401/TinderboxforWindows.html
October 9, 2011 at 9:32 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Looks like http://www.eastgate.com/Tinderbox/ is still for Mac only. Though iPhone/iPad viewer is in the labs http://www.markbernstein.org/Aug11/LabReport.html . It appears they too are "tinkering with exactly what gestures" to use/mean on mobile touch interface. I wonder whether they will come up similar gestures as on iRT Gtask Outliner; tap/doubletap/longpress/swipe have different meaning on left side than on right side of screen.
I'm not likely to get a Mac, too. But I did buy an iPad earlier this year to try out apps for iOS/iPhone/iPad that are locked into Apple's walled garden. You just can't avoid hands on testing, to really understand how a touch mobile apps will work for you.
I'm not likely to get a Mac, too. But I did buy an iPad earlier this year to try out apps for iOS/iPhone/iPad that are locked into Apple's walled garden. You just can't avoid hands on testing, to really understand how a touch mobile apps will work for you.
October 10, 2011 at 3:33 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
I'm still trying to get MobileOrg to run/sync. Looks like I have to get a full runnning Emac 23.3 with Orgmode first though.
I had a look at freeplane writeups not sure that outline view is as useable as a full outlining tool. I use freemind and see that it has export to ODT (OOo Writer) where you can use its Navigator in outline mode. Freemind can also export to HTML list with javascript expand/collapse buttons. No import from ODT/HTML though.
Anyway, my main interest is outlining/mindmapping on my Android mobile. Currently what I'm using and looking at ...
(1) iRT Gtask Outliner - use google tasks outlining (using)
(2) Thinking Space Pro - mindmapping use mm/mmap format) (using)
(3) MobileOrg - I like the text outlining format and desktop orgmode (looking)
(4) MindMeister Android Beta - mindmapping reads mm/mmap format (waiting on http://www.mindmeister.com/blog/2011/09/09/mindmeister-for-android-beta-3/ )
I had a look at freeplane writeups not sure that outline view is as useable as a full outlining tool. I use freemind and see that it has export to ODT (OOo Writer) where you can use its Navigator in outline mode. Freemind can also export to HTML list with javascript expand/collapse buttons. No import from ODT/HTML though.
Anyway, my main interest is outlining/mindmapping on my Android mobile. Currently what I'm using and looking at ...
(1) iRT Gtask Outliner - use google tasks outlining (using)
(2) Thinking Space Pro - mindmapping use mm/mmap format) (using)
(3) MobileOrg - I like the text outlining format and desktop orgmode (looking)
(4) MindMeister Android Beta - mindmapping reads mm/mmap format (waiting on http://www.mindmeister.com/blog/2011/09/09/mindmeister-for-android-beta-3/ )
October 10, 2011 at 6:04 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
Mark wrote:
<<I've always wanted to use Tinderbox ...>>
Having spent some more time with FreePlane, I can't see much advantage to Tinderbox. This is still a bit of a hunch, as I have not used FreePlane to do a real project, but it looks like FreePlane does everything significant that Tinderbox does, in most cases has a more useable interface (despite being multi-platform), and does not cost $100 a year!
FreePlane is *far* more scriptable, since it has an entire *real* programming language built in. It appears to have less support for graphics/backgrounds, and it is probably harder to make it generate web sites—one of Tinderbox's more successful features was template-based HTML generation, essentially turning your mind map into a web site with each node more or less a page. As excited as I was about that, I never used it beyond a few quick demos.
Next time I feel like resurrecting Tinderbox, I'll try FreePlane instead.
<<I've always wanted to use Tinderbox ...>>
Having spent some more time with FreePlane, I can't see much advantage to Tinderbox. This is still a bit of a hunch, as I have not used FreePlane to do a real project, but it looks like FreePlane does everything significant that Tinderbox does, in most cases has a more useable interface (despite being multi-platform), and does not cost $100 a year!
FreePlane is *far* more scriptable, since it has an entire *real* programming language built in. It appears to have less support for graphics/backgrounds, and it is probably harder to make it generate web sites—one of Tinderbox's more successful features was template-based HTML generation, essentially turning your mind map into a web site with each node more or less a page. As excited as I was about that, I never used it beyond a few quick demos.
Next time I feel like resurrecting Tinderbox, I'll try FreePlane instead.
October 10, 2011 at 7:08 |
Bernie
Bernie
sabre,
You'll see that I do put in my opinion of the mobile versions of org-mode. In terms of Synchronization, ease of use, stability and flexibility, Taskpaper really leads on all counts. If going mobile does interest you, the Ruby script that I uncovered on the web might be your friend. That's exactly how the author of it uses it.
http://slashusr.wordpress.com/2010/03/30/converting-from-taskpaper-to-emacs-org-mode/
We here on this forum would be using your brave exploits to test the waters...
You'll see that I do put in my opinion of the mobile versions of org-mode. In terms of Synchronization, ease of use, stability and flexibility, Taskpaper really leads on all counts. If going mobile does interest you, the Ruby script that I uncovered on the web might be your friend. That's exactly how the author of it uses it.
http://slashusr.wordpress.com/2010/03/30/converting-from-taskpaper-to-emacs-org-mode/
We here on this forum would be using your brave exploits to test the waters...
October 12, 2011 at 23:05 |
James Levine
James Levine
It is not that easy to implement Autofocus in org-mode. The core idea of AF1 is closed list. Because it divides all tasks into pages by 25-35 items, which are closed lists. And also even if you strike out some element, it is still on the page, until you strike out all of them, and this page becomes irrelevant.
You can not implement that using agenda views. Agenda views throw all todos in one unordered batch without division and without DONE elements. And i don't really know how to implement this closed list mechanism in org-mode.
Ideally it should use org-mode built-in features with minimum emacs lisp to use Autofocus in org-mode conveniently. Using grep, awk or other kind of scripts in Emacs is illogical.
You can not implement that using agenda views. Agenda views throw all todos in one unordered batch without division and without DONE elements. And i don't really know how to implement this closed list mechanism in org-mode.
Ideally it should use org-mode built-in features with minimum emacs lisp to use Autofocus in org-mode conveniently. Using grep, awk or other kind of scripts in Emacs is illogical.
November 3, 2011 at 6:50 |
sindikat
sindikat
Org Mode is supposedly outline based. Then each toplevel node can be a virtual page for AF. Not that I recommend this tool.
November 3, 2011 at 12:12 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
That's one of the approaches. However it should automatically create new heading (page) everytime number of TODOs cross 25 (or some other number).
November 3, 2011 at 14:10 |
sindikat
sindikat
I downloaded Freeplane and it was usable. But I have not found anything as good as CmapTools http://cmap.ihmc.us/Support/Help/
Concept Maps are a kind of mind map but there is a stricter syntax. Concepts are connected with linking words. CmapTools is very good for making concept maps. It's easier for this purpose than Freeplane.
Concept Maps are a kind of mind map but there is a stricter syntax. Concepts are connected with linking words. CmapTools is very good for making concept maps. It's easier for this purpose than Freeplane.
November 3, 2011 at 21:41 |
moises
moises
But I wanted to collect some more powerful elements from it's big brother: the open-source org-mode in the programming text editor, EMACS. There's a lot of mystery behind it, but suffice it to say, if you downloaded EMACS or any permutation of it today, org-mode would be preinstalled with your copy. It doesn't work perfectly out of the box, indeed everything is configurable about it, which is why its rather daunting to the "end-user" and more commonly associated with coders, who are already naturally working within a coding environment.
Nonetheless, I took a step back and can offer you a bullet list of the potential contributions Org-mode could make to your AF, even if you find other means and other tools to implement them. Let them wash over you before you judge. In no necessary order, here's what I found:
* You can use radio targets to turn any target text into a link. Great for building up a wiki or making keywords linkable to supporting material. Now you decide what they're good for.
* You can create email links to from your tasks
* You can apply keywords to tasks to represent sequential states, and you can make different workflows for different types of items you are dealing with. Debugging for example has a different cycle to completion and feedback than say, shopping.
* Keywords can also be applied as types of action items, such as context, delegation, etc.
* You can set up your keyboard for single key "tagging" of both keywords and a task's current state.
*It has built-in intellegence for keeping projects open if they are based on ordered tasks or if certain child tasks remain incomplete.
*These task states can also include the status WAIT which is imbued with further logic.
*Org can deal with a type of task with an open-state keyword, which is commonly referred to as habit tracking.
*Habit checking can recognize when a habit was not completed on that day, if it could have been completed on that day, if the task would be overdue by the next day, or if it was already overdue, and can incorporate these conditions if and when the task is done, and how this would effect the scoring of your successful habit.
*It has built in logic for distinguishing between scheduled deadlines and begin dates for working on an item. These are distinguished between agenda labels DEADLINE and SCHEDULED. They are effected dynamically by the actual completion date, and once completed will stop new entries associated with the task from populating your agenda.
*Org-mode also acknowledges that sometimes its better just to copy the task rather than set up repeats. You may do so by copying a task down the subtree and associating it with different dates.
*You can add effort estimates to a task. This is useful if you are contributing your experience to a central project manager, if you are accustomed to offering quotes and estimates, and if you want to get more accurate with your estimates through recorded examples.
*your task lists don't need to belong all in one monolithic file. Batches and views can extract from a whole set of files, and you can create separate templates for them, if one's designed to capture different types of things.
*There's a stuck projects view, which was built to accommodate GTD weekly review. It works by catching all projects that have not been assigned next actions, but it could be reconfigured to accomplish other things. Another view of the list can include project milestones or any other subject heading.
* Tasks can be timed, and the software will intelligently know how to address work interruptions if you are tracking your billable hours.
In a more science fiction vien, I can imagine org-mode could be configured to use these time stamps and the amount of time you spent on a task to evaluate what mode of AF you should be in-whether you should backwards, forwards on your list, switch to your urgent column etc. Keywords could be used to save a page, mark a task as under review. Who's to say?