Re: [Orgmode] depending TODOs, scheduling following TODOs automatically

[Bastien]

Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> writes:

> I have read this discussion with great interest, and I would like to
> add a few thoughts.

I guess some of us were waiting for that -- thanks for sorting this
out :)

> First, let me say that I was surprised that quite a few people are so
> keen to see this kind of features.

Well, maybe there are too few tutorials out there demonstrating how
people actually use Org, but everytime someone sends an example I'm
amazed how this example looks so "personal" and add something new to
what I could imagine. 

Given the number of different persons using Org (at least the number of
address@hidden subscribers?) I wouldn't be surprised that people
come up with clever use of TRIGGERS in their own planning habits.  Even
better if they share it through tutorials...

> - first of all, I believe we can keep the question of adressing an
> item (using GUIDs or relations like "next TODO item in the subtree")
> completely separate from the mechanism by which Org-mode triggers an
> action.

100% agreed (see my previous post.)

>   So we would have a property that contains a Lisp form, and that lisp
> form would be evaluated at that moment.
>   TRIGGER would then mean to perform actions in other entries.

Just to make things perfectly clear - here is the process (as I
understand it) :

1. describe the last change performed on a headline in a Lisp form
2. feed any TRIGGER with the Lisp form from 1. and perform actions

Is that right?  

>   The detailed implementation would then be a number of Lisp functions
> that take as arguments a *single* structure that contains all the info
> of the change, for example a property list like
>
>       (list :type 'TODOSTATE :from nil %to "INPROGRESS" ....)

The uncertainty of my understanding relies on the fact that I'm not sure
whether this implementation is supposed to describe the TRIGGER function
or the Lisp form from the first step of the process, as described above.

Thanks for any further clarification!

-- 
Bastien