Thanks Jean for your reply...
On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 at 14:53, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
[...] It would be nice to write it all in the Org file, yet for me such
data shall better be in the database. And links are then copied from
central place to Org files or any other files finally, or to email, or
shared by SMS, or published as web pages when necessary.
I think you touch on a couple of interesting points here.
Firstly, it could be difficult to separate out a particular application from one's Org usage overall. For me, for the particular case of this choir role, that is not the case; but I can see that it might be for others. I guess that means that the application will be better if it doesn't force you to move your fundamental data into a form specifically for that application, but is able to work well with data across your Org usage as a whole.
Secondly, when one thinks this kind of thing through, it all boils down to just two things
- tables of fundamental data
- code for operating on that data and generating summaries and derived tables.
One might then think: why still be in Org mode? As opposed to a traditional database. I think the answer, for me, is that keeping in Org and plain text means that there are so many levels of possibility that I can fall back on, if my coding and workflows turn out to be deficient in some way. Working in Emacs and Org mode just feels nice. Also, in my case, there isn't the massive scale that might motivate using a more scalable database.
Best wishes,
Neil