Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

todo.txt - v2.0 - requested features (comments, data-blob, sections, ids) #30

Closed
ramses0 opened this issue Apr 9, 2020 · 1 comment
Closed

Comments

@ramses0
Copy link

ramses0 commented Apr 9, 2020

# ...comments indicated by leading "#"
(A) - a normal task ::: <DATA-BLOB> after trailing ":::" (or similar)
-----------
(A) - sections / groupings via markdown-ish breaks (3+ dashes)
ISSUE-1234: (A) This is a tracked issue, or referenceable issue-identifier

Comments
Benefits: Human-readable instructions, "do-not-process" items, temporarily remove items
Drawbacks: Increased complexity, keep comments out of "todo's"

Data-Blob
Many of my todo's need a URL, so I've been informally using:

(A) Search for Best Website ::: https://www.google.com/
(B) This is effectively the title ::: this is effectively like a newline or "ignorable" area for most clients
(C) Register for appointment at DMV ::: https://some.long.dmv.url.gov/form/some-thing/here.cfm
(D) A complicated issue ::: { "json": "blob", "goes": "...here..." }

Within my editor, I've tweaked the syntax highlighting to make the URL's and "junk" more ignorable after the "end-of-title" marker (I'm using ::: but I have no special attachment to the syntax).

+ syntax  match  TodoDataBlock  ':::\s.\+$'                 contains=NONE
+ highlight  default  link  TodoDataBlock  Comment

Benefits: consistently allow "fancy" or "ignorable" data (slightly differently from foo:blah-blah which is currently documented)
Drawbacks: sometimes really-long-lines, may not want to encourage this type of behaviour of putting a bunch of arbitrary data into a file like this

Sections

Sometimes you have a batch of items which would benefit from grouping. My ideal use case is to be able to sort or filter items only within a section boundary (ie: treat each section as if it were mostly a separate todo.txt document). I'm weakly optimistic about the usefulness of this, it can definitely be simulated via a task with a title of only "------", but often you end up with "cutline" type decisions where something is "above the line" or "below the line" ... basically internalizing the inclusion of the idea of "line".

Benefits: versatile, may match common usage
Drawbacks: how is this any different than just an arbitrary task named: "-----"

ID's

"If a task has an identifier it must have a priority. Identifiers must be all-uppercase followed by a dash and a series of numbers and terminated by a colon and space. Regex-ish: ^/[A-Z]+-[0-9]+: .*$/ "

Benefits: allows a bit of round-tripping between common bug-tracking, work-tracking systems (ie: dump-to-todo.txt), ability to refer to presumably unique identifiers
Drawbacks: increased complexity, may not support tracking systems with non-numeric identifiers


# this is an example "v2.0" proposal for todo.txt
ISSUE-001: (A) `todo.txt` does not support comments or identifiers
(B) review `todo.txt` issues ::: https://github.com/todotxt/todo.txt/issues
-----------
# issues below here are unlikely to be tackled this week
(C) fix all the bugs
(D) make tons of improvements

To be clear: My request / proposal is mostly to determine what "breaking" changes for todo.txt tools would be valuable. I've discovered: [ ids, data-blobs, comments, sections/breaks ]. I'm proposing the above topics with a proposed syntax/rules.

ID's: ID-1234: (A) ____
Data: ____ ::: https://url.goes.here.com/
Comments: # ______
Sections: --------

...I would suggest any "v2" discussions split between capabilities and syntax-for-those

I'd love feedback on thumbs-up/thumbs-down specifically for the CAPABILITIES suggested here, and a lot less feedback/bike-shedding on this particular syntax. eg: if "comments" are universally accepted, then syntax may be: #, //, --, /* ... */, etc..., but do people agree that "comments" are something that has a place in the format? Same with data-blobs ( ::: .*$ or { ... }$ or >>> .*$, etc.)... is it a useful concept or should it be omitted?

@ramses0
Copy link
Author

ramses0 commented Apr 9, 2020

Calling out other discussion on a "2.0" set of issues:

#11 (comment)

...the issues I've described overlap with [comments] (universally desired), [task-level-comments] (for me that's "data-blob" at the end mostly for URL's).

...and for a snarky versioning name? todo.2do? 2do.txt? ;-)

@todotxt todotxt locked and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 21, 2021

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants