From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rainer Stengele Subject: Re: relative scheduling Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:26:22 +0200 Message-ID: <470BE3EE.4020200@diplan.de> References: <3jve9n6oxf.fsf@home.net> <29178d4ffee1d1d7a249c67ca0592b65@science.uva.nl> <20071009133340.46b19f75@dhcp-296-6> <87sl4kdmu1.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLev-0003eN-Pm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:26:29 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLev-0003dK-0w for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:26:29 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLeu-0003dH-Re for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:26:28 -0400 Received: from ns.diplan.de ([212.34.188.4] helo=mail.diplan.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IfLeu-0000qh-Eh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:26:28 -0400 Received: from [IPv6:::1] (fritz.diplan.de [192.168.99.5]) by mail.diplan.de (Postfix outbound) with ESMTP id 7C1B0D8F9B for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 22:26:24 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87sl4kdmu1.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Bastien schrieb: > John Rakestraw writes: > >> Perhaps this is personal preference, but somehow it seems more >> reasonable to me to reschedule from today. This not only avoids >> problems if (I don't know that) an event is already scheduled, but it >> also fits in better with my thinking about tasks. Even if it's Monday >> and I'm thinking about rescheduling a task that's now scheduled for >> Wednesday, I'm still inclined to think about the new date relative to >> today rather than relative to Wednesday. >> >> So, even if it's merely my personal preference, that's my vote ;). > > Since we're voting, I hope I'll cause no damage to any further agreement > by voting for the *other* solution :) > > Most of the time, I'm rescheduling when: > > 1. the date of the event moved; in this case, it easier to reschedule > relatively to the initial date. > > 2. the date is *today* and I want to delay the task: in this case, there > is no difference between the two solution :) > > Okay, you might ponder my vote like this: (* vote .75) > I see passed events in agenda view and therefore see easily how may days they are already "behind". Hence I would personally (!) also find it more "intuitive" to reschedule relatively. rainer